SF under current moderate leadership has authorized ordinances for restaurant workers guaranteeing health plans and mandating employer contributions, a proposed rule that has irked the professional organization of restauranteurs, who are prosecuting the matter in the region IX court in Pasadena; see Egelko’s article on the BushCo amicus status in the case, in an article published today.

Also, I appreciate the findlaw link from klynn; I would characterize that Sentelle joined decision as less than a permanent, and would imagine EPIC to have ongoing interest in the similar Cheney energy taskforce consultations. Maybe we will see more sunshine in government laws in the next congress as counterpoint to the past few years of executive on steroids.

There is one recipe in my archive that echoes the comments about molasses, above, better with a more purified ingredient, though probably suitable only for children, excess sugar, for people who allow children to have a lot of that.

Re the ChicagoTimes link from reader, above, the article is hyperpolitical and jingoistic, but like bmaz’ skinny comment, reflects well on Ms. Hensley’s charitable pursuits. Ew is right, though, the media’s reportage on these minutiae, to me, suggests more of the retrenchment and downsizing in treepulpbased media and vapidity based videosoundbiteconsciousness.

PMs are not heads of state, so their wives are not First Ladies. (We have had one woman PM, briefly, but she was single at the time — divorced, actually.) The queen is head of state, and then there’s her rep in Canada, the governor general, also at the moment a woman (as was her predecessor), and in public, they walk first. So few of the PMs’ wives have tried the first-lady number; Mila Mulroney did, and Margaret Trudeau was more interesting than usual, but most have remained pretty private, including, also interestingly, Laureen Harper, who really seems to have a life of her own, and good for her.

http://www.thestar.com/article/414652

http://www.thestar.com/article/415398

And in terms of your question at 137… by law the position of First Lady is considered a part of the EO and is protected with Executive Privilege as such in the court’s eyes. I posted about this a while back when discussing the legal backing Cheney was using for his “Fourth Branch.”

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020206.html

Back to one of the other topics of the thread: Is First Lady an official position of some kind? It can’t be in the constitution. Is this just a question of custom, or was the position somehow instituted?

It’s true that political leaders’ spouses everywhere get paraded on certain occasions, but some First Ladies seem more official than others. This has to be a custom whose time is coming to an end. Clinton cracked the mould in some ways, but more by sharing her husband’s job than by distancing herself from it. It would be interesting to see a president’s wife some day just say, “Sorry — I’m too busy today.”

“Pigs in a White House” it is, then.

My Mother’s recipe does not state that one should peel the potatoes first, but she always did so. After all, how else do you make the “house” white?

Happy eating,
Bob in HI