Is Rand Paul Going Mainstream or the GOP Going Libertarian?

Rand Paul seems to be crossing over to the mainstream — or maybe, it’s the other way around.

When Kentucky’s junior senator arrived in Washington just over two years ago, he seemed destined to inhabit the role of perpetual outlier. But now, he’s in the mix on just about everything that is happening, and talked about as a credible Republican presidential contender in 2016.

Read the rest here.

My take is that Rand understands something that his father, a great man of principle, never seemed to grasp. Ron Paul's flaw, one  that has been a major reason libertarians have never been more than a blip on the political radar screen, was failing to realize that you can have all the principles in the world, but if you don't win elections the other people will dictate policy.

Rand is a moderate libertarian. That is of course anathema to a lot of the hard core libertarians. But while his father must be given credit for shining a light on libertarianism, he never had a shot at winning a national election. Rand does. Great politicians are never ideologues. They are men like LBJ and Reagan who understand the art of the deal and how to get a good chunk of what they want by negotiation and compromise with the understanding they can go after the rest later on.

I don't know if I can support Rand Paul for president. It's too soon for that. But I will say that he is clearly a far savvier politician than his father.

Attention conspiracy theorists

Here's an old one that hasn't gotten much love in recent years that looks set for a comeback.

The producers of an upcoming documentary on TWA Flight 800—which exploded and crashed into the waters off Long Island, N.Y., on July 17, 1996, killing all 230 people on board—claim to have proof that an explosion outside the Paris-bound flight caused the crash. And six former investigators who took part in the film say there was a cover-up and want the case reopened.

"There was a lack of coordination and willful denial of information," Hank Hughes, a senior accident investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board, said Wednesday during a conference call with reporters. "There were 755 witnesses. At no time was information provided by the witnesses shared by the FBI."

Read the rest here.

1 Year Later: Wikileaks Assange to Remain in Embassy

(Reuters) - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says he will not leave the sanctuary of the Ecuadorean Embassy in London even if Sweden stops pursuing sexual assault claims against him because he fears arrest on the order of the United States.

In an interview with Reuters and others to mark the one-year anniversary of taking refuge in the cramped diplomatic building, Assange said he remained hopeful he might be able to leave but offered little evidence to suggest he would be finding new living quarters anytime soon.

"I wouldn't say I wouldn't leave," he said. "(But) my lawyers have advised me I shouldn't leave the embassy because of the risk of arrest in relation to the risk of arrest and extradition to the United States."

When asked whether he would remain inside even if Sweden dropped the investigation against him, Assange said: "That's correct."

Read the rest here.

Memo to the G8: You are heads of state, not bachelors at a stag party

Mention the lack of ties at the #G8 on Twitter and you get a torrent of replies from those who think it's all gone a bit too far (and the odd slacker moaning about the patriarchy's insidious phallic symbol). Turns out George Osborne explained the "smart casual" dress code earlier (I missed it) after being asked about Dave's rolled-up sleeves/lumberjack look. He told the BBC: "Basically I am doing what I was asked to do, which is turn up in smart-casual wear. I have followed to the letter: I got out my jacket and my blue shirt." His statement troubles me. For a start, who set the dress code? The Foreign Office? And why should he follow it? He's the Chancellor: nothing about him should be casual.

G8 summits are notorious for their sartorial excesses: matching floral shirts, ponchos, stetsons, it has become a commonplace for the host country to rope the visitors into trying on some sort of local dress. Yet what happens when the world's most powerful men (sic) gather in the UK? We make them dress like bachelors emerging into the bleary dawn after a vigorous stag party. We might as well ask them to wear jeans. What's wrong with a bit of understated English tailoring, as a way of plugging one of our more successful exports? In fact, it's London Fashion Week. There's all kind of natty pastel numbers available, rather than the blue blazers. But for my money, they should tie one on to show they take the taxpayer – and their responsibilities – seriously. (emphasis mine A/O)

From here.

Can I have an "Amen!" please?

551 Years Ago Today: A Great Victory Against Islamic Invaders

Vlad III (Dracula)

...Finally, Mehmed trapped his enemy in a mountain pass and set up siege, determined to wait till Vlad and his followers starved or surrendered. Recognizing his peril, the Wallachian prince determined to meet death in a manner befitting the temper of his blood. He laid his plans on that June evening, and waited till nightfall.

The Ottoman camp lay in silence. Suddenly, a trumpet blast brayed out. The rumble of rushing feet and roaring voices swelled over the tents as Vlad III lead a surprise attack in the dead of night, blades gleaming in the torchlight. The prince threshed a path toward Mehmed’s tent, spreading chaos and carnage with the ferocity of his invasion. The panicked Turks reeled beneath the blow, until the Janissaries rallied themselves. Encircling the Sultan, they drove the Wallachians back into the gloom—only after fifteen thousand Turks had been butchered.

This famous skirmish of June 17, 1462, allegedly left Mehmed II petrified. With his forces in tatters and demoralized, he abandoned the chase of Vlad Dracul, allowing the Wallachians to return to Targoviste. Soon afterwards, however, Mehmed repented pulling away and marched on the capital after Vlad. Another surprise awaited him there. The gates of the city stood open. No resistance was offered.

And twenty thousand dead Turks surrounded the city, impaled on stakes.

Read the rest here.

Barking Mad

The US Military wants to let women into the special forces.

Urban Exploration: America's Crumbling Buildings in Photos

A fascinating look at some of our older buildings as they decay and crumble.

HT: Bill TGF

'We were told to lie'

Bank of America routinely denied qualified borrowers a chance to modify their loans to more affordable terms and paid cash bonuses to bank staffers for pushing homeowners into foreclosure, according to affidavits filed last week in a Massachusetts lawsuit.

"We were told to lie to customers," said Simone Gordon, who worked in the bank's loss mitigation department until February 2012. "Site leaders regularly told us that the more we delayed the HAMP [loan] modification process, the more fees Bank of America would collect."

In sworn testimony, six former employees describe what they saw behind the scenes of an often opaque process that has frustrated homeowners, their attorneys and housing counselors.

They describe systematic efforts to undermine the program by routinely denying loan modifications to qualified applicants, withholding reviews of completed applications, steering applicants to costlier "in-house" loans and paying bonuses to employees based on the number of new foreclosures they initiated.

The employees' sworn testimony goes a long way to explain why the government's Home Affordable Modification Program, launched in 2008 during the depths of the housing collapse, has fallen so far short of the original targets to save millions of Americans from being tossed from their homes.

Bank of America denied the allegations in the affidavits, which were filed in a Massachusetts lawsuit on behalf of dozens of Bank of America borrowers in 26 states.

Read the rest here.

Banks are the enemy.

Conservatives likely to write most remaining decisions in Supreme Court’s term

It’s time for the conservative justices on the Supreme Court to get to work.

That’s not an accusation of sloth but a reflection of reality. As the court heads into the crucial final weeks of the term, it is apparent that the great majority of remaining decisions will be authored by the court’s most consistent conservatives.

It’s a conclusion drawn from a numbers game that is unique to the Supreme Court and easy enough even for journalists and lawyers, who often joke that they chose their professions on the promise that there would be no math or hard science.

Read the rest here.

Syria

Judge: Obama sex assault comments 'unlawful command influence'

Two defendants in military sexual assault cases cannot be punitively discharged, if found guilty, because of “unlawful command influence” derived from comments made by President Barack Obama, a judge ruled in a Hawaii military court this week.

Navy Judge Cmdr. Marcus Fulton ruled during pretrial hearings in two sexual assault cases — U.S. vs. Johnson and U.S. vs. Fuentes — that comments made by Obama as commander in chief would unduly influence any potential sentencing, according to a court documents obtained by Stars and Stripes.

On Wednesday and Thursday, Fulton approved the pretrial defense motions, which used as evidence comments that Obama made about sexual assault at a May 7 news conference.

“The bottom line is: I have no tolerance for this,” Obama said, according to an NBC News story submitted as evidence by defense attorneys in the sexual assault cases.

‘I expect consequences,” Obama added. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable — prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”

The judge’s pretrial ruling means that if either defendant is found guilty, whether by a jury or a military judge, they cannot receive a bad conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge. Sailors found guilty under the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s Article 120, which covers several sexual crimes including assault and rape, generally receive punitive discharges.

Read the rest here.

Life in a Socialist Paradise

...“We Venezuelans have always been very creative,” said Claudia Sucre, who was once kidnapped but managed to fool her abductors into thinking she wasn’t affluent. “We’ve reinvented things so we can live our lives feeling like we’re in a safe place, so as to not lose our enthusiasm.”

So young people invited to parties take their pajamas, staying over to sleep once festivities end and avoid the lonely drive home at night, when they could be kidnapped.

Maria Blasini, 47, spoke of how when she leaves the bank she waves around her deposit slip to ensure that lurking robbers see that her money is in the vault. Many take to the streets with decoy phones — say, the cheap state-made Vergatarios — to avoid losing a $400 smartphone.

Some drive low-key cars because they fear kidnappers target those in fancier vehicles. Soccer moms now install bulletproof plating in their SUVs.

Lately, those who want to attend a wedding or to enjoy a leisurely dinner hire bodyguards — for just a few hours.

Read the rest here.

The Post Office and the Missing $1300 Laptop

A woman in California recently sold a laptop computer of hers on eBay for $1,300, but it never arrived at the buyer’s house. The seller had paid the U.S. Postal Service for insurance and delivery confirmation on the package, so she should be able to get her money back and see who signed for the package. Not quite.

She tells CBS Sacramento’s Kurtis Ming that USPS denied her insurance claim because the package was delivered and signed for as requested, but when she asked to see the proof of signature, the box was blank. So either the recipient had signed in invisible ink or no one had signed at all because the package was lost or stolen in transit.

Nope, insisted USPS, that’s a signature. She appealed her claim twice and no one would admit that there was absolutely no proof that the package had been delivered. In fact, all evidence seemed to show that the package had not arrived.

Read the rest here.

Detroit’s Creditors Asked to Accept Pennies on the Dollar

DETROIT — An emergency manager who was sent to reverse the fortunes of this financially troubled city asked some of its creditors on Friday to accept pennies on the dollar as he laid out his plan for tackling Detroit’s staggering debt, kick-starting negotiations that could determine whether the city is headed to bankruptcy court. 

Read the rest here.

CBS: Somebody (cough cough) broke into one of our computers

...“A cyber security firm hired by CBS News has determined through forensic analysis that Sharyl Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions late in 2012. Evidence suggests this party performed all access remotely using Attkisson’s accounts. While no malicious code was found, forensic analysis revealed an intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data.

This party also used sophisticated methods to remove all possible indications of unauthorized activity, and alter system times to cause further confusion.

...CBS News is taking steps to identify the responsible party and their method of access.”

Read the rest here.

The left turns compliant on violating civil liberties

Where have all the liberals gone?

President Obama, who as a Democratic senator accused the Bush administration of violating civil liberties in the name of security, now vigorously defends his own administration’s collection of Americans’ phone records and Internet activities.  of Americans’ phone records and Internet activities.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he thinks Congress has done sufficient intelligence oversight. His evidence? Opinion polls.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi defended the programs’ legality and said she wants Edward Snowden prosecuted for leaking details of the secret operations.

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, accused Snowden of treason and defended false testimony given to her committee by the director of national intelligence, who in March had denied the programs’ existence.

With some exceptions, progressive lawmakers and the liberal commentariat have been passive and acquiescent toward the secret spying programs, which would have infuriated the left had they been the work of a Republican administration.

Read the rest here.

Eugene Robinson: Scalia was right

The Supreme Court’s ruling last week, allowing police to compel DNA samples from persons arrested for serious offenses, will solve cold cases around the country and put dangerous criminals behind bars. But despite this clearly beneficial impact, the court’s 5 to 4 ruling was wrong — and may be more far-reaching than we can now imagine.

The words “Antonin Scalia was right” do not flow easily for me. But the court’s most uncompromising conservative, who wrote a withering dissent, was correct when he issued a dire-sounding warning from the bench: “Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason.”

Read the rest here.

Another Jurisdictional Food Fight

This crap is getting old.

The Scowling Face of the State

In the fall of 1996, at the campaign’s climax, Democrats filed with the Federal Election Commission charges against Salvi’s campaign alleging campaign finance violations. These charges dominated the campaign’s closing days. Salvi spoke by telephone with the head of the FEC’s Enforcement Division, who he remembers saying: “Promise me you will never run for office again, and we’ll drop this case.” He was speaking to Lois Lerner.

After losing to Durbin, Salvi spent four years and $100,000 fighting the FEC, on whose behalf FBI agents visited his elderly mother demanding to know, concerning her $2,000 contribution to her son’s campaign, where she got “that kind of money.” When the second of two federal courts held that the charges against Salvi were spurious, the lawyer arguing for the FEC was Lois Lerner.

Read the rest here.

Hip Hip... whatever

According to the ACNA’s Provincial Meeting Journal, the most recent draft liturgies reduce the filioque to a footnote. Joel Wilhelm does an admirable job (as usual) of summarizing:

    ACNA’s Provincial Meeting Journal is out and it shows ACNA talking out of both sides of its mouth on the filioque, a doctrine central to all of Western Christendom. The draft liturgies in this document contain a Nicene Creed that reads:

        We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father.

    The footnote to this reads:

        The filioque clause “and the Son” may be added here. It is not included in the text above for ecumenical purposes, in accordance with the 1978 Lambeth Conference, though the ACNA does not disagree with the theology of the filioque.

Read the rest here.
HT: Dr. Tighe

Let's see. They don't doctrinally affirm the first seven Ecumenical Councils. (We can leave #s 8 & 9 aside for now.) They permit and to some degree embrace Calvinism. And they claim to ordain women. But they want us to know that they are thinking about dropping the Filioque.

Sorry guys. You are still Protestants.