Fausta's Blog

h/t Babalu & WSJ

Live on C-SPAN2, Rand Paul filibustering the Brennan nomination. He started at 11:45AM and is on a roll.

As Emily Zanotti Skyles put it,

There’s nothing better than a straight-up for-reals filibuster. I can’t wait until Rand Paul gets to the Betty Crocker cookbook.

He has a ways to go. Right now he’s talking about privacy rights, and there’s plenty to say on that topic.

UPDATE:
Ted Cruz joins in,

ABC, CNN and NBC are shocked, shocked! that NJ governor Chris Chistie was not invited to speak at CPAC this year. There’s even a Memeorandum link by now.

Why the big fuss?

Apparently their hopes of Christie being a front-runner among conservatives have been dashed, since “At least eight potential presidential contenders will be speaking at CPAC”. You’d think that by now, political reporters would have figured out that Republican and conservative are not synonyms.

But let’s not disabuse them of their notions, and encourage them to believe that, if Governor Christie beeeehaves, he’ll be invited to next year’s Oscars.

Ted Cruz is in the unique position of being a Senator who’ll most likely never run for POTUS since he was born in Canada. His professional background is second to no one’s (particularly the current POTUS’s),

Before being elected, Ted received national acclaim as the Solicitor General of Texas, the State’s chief lawyer before the U.S. Supreme Court.  Serving under Attorney General Greg Abbott, Ted was the nation’s youngest Solicitor General, the longest serving Solicitor General in Texas, and the first Hispanic Solicitor General of Texas.

In private practice in Houston, Ted spent five years as a partner at one of the nation’s largest law firms, where he led the firm’s U.S. Supreme Court and national Appellate Litigation practice.

Ted has authored more than 80 U.S. Supreme Court briefs and argued 43 oral arguments, including nine before the U.S. Supreme Court.  During Ted’s service as Solicitor General, Texas achieved an unprecedented series of landmark national victories, including successfully defending:

• U.S. sovereignty against the UN and the World Court in Medellin v. Texas;
• The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms;
• The constitutionality of the Texas Ten Commandments monument;
• The constitutionality of the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance;
• The constitutionality of the Texas Sexually Violent Predator Civil Commitment law; and
• The Texas congressional redistricting plan.

The National Law Journal has called Ted “a key voice” to whom “the [U.S. Supreme Court] Justices listen.”  Ted has been named by American Lawyer magazine as one of the 50 Best Litigators under 45 in America, by the National Law Journal as one of the 50 Most Influential Minority Lawyers in America, and by Texas Lawyer as one of the 25 Greatest Texas Lawyers of the Past Quarter Century.

From 2004-09, he taught U.S. Supreme Court Litigation as an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Texas School of Law.

Prior to becoming Solicitor General, he served as the Director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Federal Trade Commission, as Associate Deputy Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice, and as Domestic Policy Advisor on the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign.

Ted graduated with honors from Princeton University and with high honors from Harvard Law School.  He served as a law clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the U.S. Supreme Court.  He was the first Hispanic ever to clerk for the Chief Justice of the United States.

Cruz has jumped into the fray:

So far he is the only senator who has dared challenge the many blatant falsehoods President Obama and many congressional Democrats have been pushing regarding guns, in particular the bogus claim that 40 percent of gun sales are done without background checks.

To add to the Dems’ outrage, Cruz is demanding that Chuck Hagel disclose the source of funds Hagel receive for speeches (particularly $200,000),

Lanny Davis is among the few democrats who agree that Hagel should make full disclosure.

Behold, the birth of Ted Cruz Derangement syndrome: IS SENATOR TED CRUZ OUR NEW MCCARTHY?

A guy who was at Harvard Law at the same time as TC had this to say,

@ryanlizza I was there then. Cruz is basically correct: there were more Marxists than Republicans. Mayer should have talked to more people.

— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) February 22, 2013

This is only the beginning, folks.

Give ‘em hell, Ted!

UPDATE:
Linked by Extrano’s Alley. Thank you!

When liberals want you in the minority plantation:

They’d be attacking him no matter what just because he’s a rising star from the other party, but yes, of course it’s true that a rising star who’s Latino complicates Democratic plans for a permanent majority in a way that some other Republican wouldn’t.

Listen to this incoherent rant, calling Rubio “brownface” for liking Tupac,

“The motive for the attacks on Rubio is the threat he may pose as a rising star. The Dems would attack him regardless of why he appears to be a rising star. But there’s no doubt that Rubio’s ethnicity is a factor in the perception that he’s someone whose momentum needs to be slowed.”

It gets more interesting, as Ted Cruz is also under fire:

Cruz is under attack because he’s outdebating Democrats and making the likes of Chuck Hagel look bad. The Dems are used to dealing with Republicans who don’t forcefully take them on in debate or who, though willing to engage, have difficulty making well thought-out arguments (e.g., John McCain, the ipse dixit king).

However, I disagree with Paul Mirengoff when he says that

Cruz is something new in town, and the Dems don’t like it. But their problem with Cruz has no relation, not even an indirect one, to his ethnicity.

I know from experience that liberals will not accept a “minority” that doesn’t toe the victimization line.

After all, that’s their main industry.

After raising $160,000 for his Reclaim America PAC, Marco Rubio’s shaking water bottles with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel:

Awesome. Rubio & Netanyahu twitter.com/jacktink/statu…

— jack tinker (@jacktink) February 20, 2013

Stay thirsty, my friends!

(h/t Babalu)

Members of the media can’t notice Joe Biden’s brain farts malapropisms, but they’re outraged that Marco Rubio sips water.

Behold the Marco Rubio water bottle,

“Send the liberal detractors a message that not only does Marco Rubio inspire you. … He hydrates you too,”

Salud!

UPDATE,
Linked by Bits Blog and Peach Pundit. Thank you!
Linked by Georgia Slate. Thank you!

First, the luncheon menu was 3,000 calories:

First Course:
Steamed Lobster with New England Clam Chowder Sauce
Lobster Tails
New England Clam Chowder Sauce
Sauteed Spinach
Sweet Potato Hay
Per Serving: Calories 783, Fat 45.7g, Saturated Fat 16g, Cholesterol 247 mg, Sodium 1819 mg, Carbohydrates 55g, Dietary Fiber 7.5g, Sugar 14g, Protein 29g

Second Course:
Hickory Grilled Bison with Red Potato Horseradish Cake and Wild Huckleberry Reduction
Bison
Butternut Squash Puree
Baby Golden Beets and Green Beans
Red Potato Horseradish Cake
Strawberry Preserve and Red Cabbage
Wild Huckleberry Reduction
Per Serving: Calories 1184, Fat 34.6g, Saturated Fat 16g, Cholesterol 177mg, Sodium 7445mg, Carbohydrates, 149g, Dietary Fiber 16.7, Sugar 97.2g, Protein 51g

Third Course:
Hudson Valley Apple Pie with Sour Cream Ice Cream, Aged Cheese and Honey
Pie Dough
Cinnamon Crumble
Apples
Sour Cream Ice Cream
Maple Caramel Sauce
Garnish
Artisan Cheeses
Per Serving: Calories 1060, Fat 64.4g, Saturated Fat 39g, Cholesterol 331mg, Sodium 488mg, Carbohydrates, 108.5g, Dietary Fiber 1.7g, Sugar 75g, Protein 14g
Total Nutritional Counts (not including booze pairing): Calories 3027, Fat 145 g, Saturated Fat 71g (49% of fat), Sodium 9752 mg, Total Carbs 312.5g, Sugar 186.2g (59% of carbs)

And the eye roll,

Can’t you see I’m eating?

Before the election, it was never mentioned. Now they’re even talking about it on the Weather Channel.

Steven Hayward sums my feelings in one sentence: DUMB AND DUMBER: THE STUPID PARTY MARCHES ON.

Go read the whole thing.

Famed political scientist Harvey Mansfield is the WSJ’s weekend interview,
The Crisis of American Self-Government
Harvey Mansfield, Harvard’s ‘pet dissenter,’ on the 2012 election, the real cost of entitlements, and why he sees reason for hope.

‘We have now an American political party and a European one. Not all Americans who vote for the European party want to become Europeans. But it doesn’t matter because that’s what they’re voting for. They’re voting for dependency, for lack of ambition, and for insolvency.”

For those who want to split hairs as to which European party, essentially all European politicians and their parties embrace dependency on government-funded social programs, be them public-funded college educations, pensions, or medical care.

Mansfield continues,

The welfare state’s size isn’t what makes it so stifling, Mr. Mansfield says. “What makes government dangerous to the common good is guaranteed entitlements, so that you can never question what expenses have been or will be incurred.” Less important at this moment are spending and tax rates. “I don’t think you can detect the presence or absence of good government,” he says, “simply by looking at the percentage of GDP that government uses up. That’s not an irrelevant figure but it’s not decisive. The decisive thing is whether it’s possible to reform, whether reform is a political possibility.”

What does he want the Republicans to do?

Conservatives should be the party of judgment, not just of principles,” he says. “Of course there are conservative principles—free markets, family values, a strong national defense—but those principles must be defended with the use of good judgment. Conservatives need to be intelligent, and they shouldn’t use their principles as substitutes for intelligence. Principles need to be there so judgment can be distinguished from opportunism. But just because you give ground on principle doesn’t mean you’re an opportunist.”

Nor should flexibility mean abandoning major components of the conservative agenda—including cultural values—in response to a momentary electoral defeat. “Democrats have their cultural argument, which is the attack on the rich and the uncaring,” Mr. Mansfield says. “So Republicans need their cultural arguments to oppose the Democrats’, to say that goodness or justice in our country is not merely the transfer of resources to the poor and vulnerable. We have to take measures to teach the poor and vulnerable to become a little more independent and to prize independence, and not just live for a government check. That means self-government within each self, and where are you going to get that except with morality, responsibility and religion?”

Words to live by, indeed.

Go read the whole thing.

Here’s a selection of Mansfield’s books:

Cross-posted at Liberty Unyielding.