“Congratulations, Senator Clinton. I always found you to be very prepared, very thorough, very thoughtful. And I’m sure you’re going bring all of those same things to the State Department.”

Mind you, someone (Barbara Boxer, D-CA) did also say to her:

“You’ve set your ego aside for the sake of world peace and the good of the country, I mean that, you know I do.”

Which is, as my friend Rick points out, the kind of remark which earns one the Medal of Freedom.

Here’s some choice MSNBC coverage of Clinton’s hearing. Respectively: the basic Nightly News report; Countdown’s take; and The Rachel Maddow Show:

And here they are walking and talking and such. Well, talking, at least:

Know what struck me most as I watched that video? That it’s really close. It’s about to happen. Any day now (January 20th – Ed) Barack Obama is becoming President. Wow.

*Update* Rachel Maddow talks about the meeting (and includes footage of a new interview with Obama, which leaps rather strangely from talk of the economic stimulus package to body-surfing in Hawaii, but still):

Once upon a time, there was a Governor in Illinois called Rod Blagojevich. No one liked him much, because he was a cocky little so-and-so, and had a very silly hairdo.

There was also a Senator in Illinois called Barack Hussein Obama, who was greatly liked. Partly because he didn’t have a silly hairdo.

The Little Senator Who Could got elected to be President Of The United States – thus leaving his Senate seat empty. (Unlike in Britain, where you can be both the MP for Sedgefield and also the Prime Minister.  British MPs thus being more capable, or less conscientious, than American Senators. Take your pick.)

Now, when a Senate seat is left empty in such a case, it falls to a state’s governor (in our story: Blagojevich) to appoint the new Senator.

But guess what?! Blagojevich thought he could try to sell the Senate seat – for, y’know, gold and riches and haircuts and things – and was caught on tape a) trying to do just that and b) calling Obama a “motherf*****”.

An investigation ensued. The Democrats and Senator-turned-President-elect Obama’s team wiped their hands of Blagojevich and said that any selection made by Blagojevich (for a new Senator) would go unrecognised by them. What with him being under investigation, an’ all.

But remember that whole thing about Blagojevich being a cocky little so-and-so? Well, he is. So he went ahead and appointed someone anyway.

Enter Roland Burris.

And exit Roland Burris when he arrived in Washington to take that Senate seat:

Here was Rachel Maddow (and the great Ana Marie Cox) covering the Burris story – as well as coverage of the other Senators being sworn-in – yesterday:

“Obama is sending an unequivocal message that controversial administration policies approving harsh interrogations, waterboarding and extraordinary renditions – the secret transfer of prisoners to other governments with a history of torture – and warrantless wiretapping are over, said several officials.”

Rachel Maddow covers the picks – and the other headlines from Obama’s first day:

Ten men a-losing,

Nine people vying,

Eight years a-sobbing,

Seven houses standing,

Six guys a-playing,

Five bold things,

Four scientists,

Three million jobs,

Two little girls,

And Joe Biden for VP!

It revolves around his choice of evangelical pastor Rick Warren – acknowledged by many to be the most powerful pastor in America (his weekly Californian congregation regularly hits the 25,000 people mark) – to read the invocation at his inauguration ceremony.

Now, don’t even get me started on the whole separation of church and state issue, and why on earth Bible quotes and readings from pastors should be part of a Presidential swearing-in ceremony (nor indeed why such importance and respect is given to religious people – yes, I’m with Dawkins on this one). But that aside, the controversy surrounding Warren is less to do with his presence – as I say, inauguration ceremonies always have a strongly Christian element – but his beliefs. Specifically his beliefs given Obama and the Democrat party’s progressive agenda.

Because the choice of a vehemently pro-life, anti-gay, anti-atheist evangelical pastor to read the invocation at, say, a Bush swearing-in ceremony wouldn’t be much of a surprise, nor a big deal – it’s to be expected.

But the choice of such a man – particularly one whose opinions on gay rights and Proposition 8 is so vocal, so powerful and so intolerant (and of course so offensive to many of us) – by Barack Obama has left many supporters and commentators in the US reeling, including the Human Rights Campaign.

To others, Obama’s choice is neither surprising nor a big deal, given a) his personally conservative Christian stance on gay marriage (as opposed to other aspects of gay rights) and b) his inclusive approach to politics, and belief in working across political and ideological lines. Warren is also, after all, merely giving a reading – not being given a cabinet post or anything. That said, as many have pointed out, where does Obama draw the line of tolerance and acceptability? Would he invite someone who’s an avowed racist to speak at his swearing-in ceremony, for example? And if not, why give a platform to an avowed homophobe?

Obama defended his choice of Warren at a press conference yesterday – and interestingly, as Keith Olbermann points out, in doing so, made the most explicit pro-gay statement of any POTUS (or PEOTUS):

Indeed, some are saying that Obama has deliberately chosen Warren precisely in order to bring the issue of gay rights and Prop 8 to the fore – a rather twisty-turny way of looking at things, but given that he’s the consummate politician, possibly not an unthinkable idea.

Here was Keith Olbermann covering the story last night:

Rob Boston from Americans United also made some brilliant points on Countdown:

(Boston’s point about Warren attacking atheists is just as valid to me personally – get a load of this cuckoo-ness.)

I also recommend checking out the excellent ongoing commentary over on Andrew Sullivan’s blog. This one is going to run and run – and quite rightly, too.

*Update* Here was the ever-thoughtful Rachel Maddow’s take on the matter last night – including footage of Warren’s now-infamous comparison of gay marriage to paedophilia and incest, and smart comments from San Franciscan mayor Gavin Newsom:

I’m with Malcolm on this one. Obama is clearly choosing the best and most talented people, who also share his general values and priorities. Who cares if some of them are Washington old hands?