This just in from Nation Washington Intern Te-Ping Chen:

There have been so many egregious dealings emerging out of Bush's cabinet -- the rancid workings of former Interior Secretary, allegations of Thomas White's insider trading -- that perhaps it's not surprising that the tracings of one cabinet member, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, have gone under-scrutinized.

But no longer, advocates say. With one year left of the beleaguered Bush Administration, American Rights at Work is hustling to shine light on Chao's record.

A former Bush Pioneer who served on thirteen corporate boards before assuming the role of Secretary of Labor, Chao has overseen some of the Department of Labor's more offensive hires, including Edwin Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health -- the former partner of Jackson Lewis, a law firm perhaps best known for its union-busting and trainings on How to Stay Union-Free.

She's also campaigned tirelessly along with her husband, Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) against the Employee Free Choice Act, worked to roll back mine provision safety, and hired several of her husband's former aides to her staff.

"Elaine Chao's family connections and corporate ties have transformed the Department of Labor into the 'Department of Business,'" said Mary Beth Maxwell, American Rights at Work's executive director.

But this morning, with the launch of their new website attacking the Secretary of Labor -- the only original member of Bush's cabinet -- Elaine Chao's "long honeymoon," says Maxwell, is over.

Among the more comic gems the Web site highlights:

The Labor Secretary's megalomania: at a mine rescue contest in 2003, Chao handed out gold-colored coins, the size of a half-dollar with Chao's bas relief at the center. Since then, Chao has lined the executive offices of the Labor Department's headquarters with 58 pictures of herself and gone on to distribute lanyards and fleece blankets embroidered with her name.

Meanwhile in February 2006, Sen. McConnell earmarked $14.2 million for his lady-love to support the christening of a library wing at the University of Louisville, to be named in honor of Elaine (who never attended the university).

All paid for by America's workers.

Comments (14)

1. "This just in from Nation Washington Intern Te-Ping Chen"

   So you have to have the Chinese-American intern do a story about the Chinese-American SecLabor?

   CYA for charges of racism, maybe?

   Posted by Mask at 02/12/2008 @ 4:52pm

2. Meanwhile in February 2006, Sen. McConnell earmarked $14.2 million for his lady-love to support the christening of a library wing at the University of Louisville, to be named in honor of Elaine (who never attended the university).

   Disgusting.

   Let's hear a few of the resident "Conserves" repudiate this.

   Posted by Dr Decibels at 02/12/2008 @ 5:37pm

3. Let's hear a few of the resident "Conserves" repudiate this.

   Posted by DR DECIBELS 02/12/2008 @ 5:37pm

   I am against it. but why would a liberal be against federal spending for more libraries on a university campus? Except for the name, you should be all for it.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/12/2008 @ 6:18pm

4. We have a Secretary of Labor? You'd never know it with the deterioration and gutting of the working class.

   Posted by yutsano at 02/12/2008 @ 6:51pm

5. Outstanding stuff.

   A big thank you to Te-Ping, and Chris.

   Now that the Obama campaign has begun to seize the upper hand over her majesty and her baggage --scandals, sell-outs, as well as her nefarious husband-- let's get some focus on some of the more heinous creatures in the Bush menagerie.

   Elaine and hubby Mitch are prime targets for sizzling sunlight via a magnifying glass.

   There ought to be hell to pay for Bush's Sherman-like destruction of our nation.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/12/2008 @ 6:58pm

6. The hypocrisy of the left is coming through strong on this post. They clamor for government spending on education -unless it has a conservative's name attached to it.

   Me, I just think it's wrong for the Fed even from a Republican to be spending on Education.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/12/2008 @ 8:14pm

7. Not supporting congressional earmarks for vanity edifaces is hardly hypocrisy. Liberals want a well thought out investment in education that will get people into higher paying jobs. We want every kid to have a chance to go to college not every government official to have a chance to get their name on a building.

   Posted by Guiles at 02/12/2008 @ 8:27pm

8. Not supporting congressional earmarks for vanity edifaces is hardly hypocrisy. Liberals want a well thought out investment in education that will get people into higher paying jobs. We want every kid to have a chance to go to college not every government official to have a chance to get their name on a building.

   Posted by GUILES 02/12/2008 @ 8:27pm

   It was 14 million for the building, not a name. So I take it you as a bad liberal don't want the fed paying to put up more education facilities? Good, now we agree.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/12/2008 @ 8:42pm

9. We want every kid to have a chance to go to college...

   Posted by GUILES 02/12/2008 @ 8:27pm

   Is there anything really monumental insurmountable standing in the kids' way? Short of very rare circumstances, they ALL have a chance.....heard of community or junior colleges?

   What's to prevent a kid from an average poor family from working part-time at McD and taking 2~4 courses?

   - Sure, they need to live at home w/mom and/or dad.....

   - Sure, they do need to go to class.....

   - Sure, they do need to keep up with homework......

   - Sure, mom and/or dad won't let them be totally `free'......

   - Sure, they will have to give up a lot of `play time'......

   - Sure, they won't have as much loose change burning holes in their pockets.....

   - Sure, they will need to take, ugh, tests.......

   - Sure, instructors and teachers will try to tell them what to do and whats good for them.......

   But other than these Inconvenient Truths, what's so monumentally difficult?

   Posted by Happy at 02/12/2008 @ 9:53pm

10. Shining the light on the Secretary of Labor? Must be a slow day.

    Posted by ACook at 02/12/2008 @ 11:02pm

11. CYA for charges of racism, maybe?

    Posted by MASK 02/12/2008 @ 4:52pm

    por favor!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/12/2008 @ 11:24pm

12. CYA for charges of racism, maybe?

    Posted by MASK 02/12/2008 @ 4:52pm

    i mean really,

    are you serious?

    so, the nation's gonna hire some black writers to cover obama?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/12/2008 @ 11:26pm

13. Me, I just think it's wrong for the Fed even from a Republican to be spending on Education.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/12/2008 @ 8:14pm

    yeah, they could teach something evil like evolution.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/12/2008 @ 11:27pm

14. Posted by HAPPY 02/12/2008 @ 9:53pm

    $493,927,331,026* ÷ $9,213** ÷ 4*** = 13,402,999 undergrad degrees.

    *you know what THAT number means

    **The tuition increases approved by the board mean that a first-year Michigan resident student entering LSA will pay $9,213 per year for tuition and all required fees,

    ***years.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/12/2008 @ 11:37pm