Paul's civil libertarianism is popular right now. Can it sow the seeds of discontent with Democratic blocs?

Image by Charles Dharapak, File / AP

WASHINGTON — Sen. Rand Paul's speech at Howard University this week — the first appearance by a Republican politician at the historically black college in over a decade — will focus on civil liberties issues, but it represents a far bigger test: can a conservative Republican reach a predominantly young, predominantly black audience?

For decades, the Republican Party has been losing ground to Democrats in those and other demographics like women, Latino and Asian voters. The result is a modern GOP that is largely old, white, male and from the South.

For Paul, a potential candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination with a libertarian streak, that sort of trend line is clearly distressing, and his Wednesday speech is clearly aimed at least testing the waters outside the traditional Republican comfort zone.

"This is part of his continuing outreach to non-traditional Republican groups, in this case African-Americans and young people," said a senior adviser to Paul who spoke on condition of anonymity, and who pointed out that Paul has been trying to make inroads with Hispanic communities as well — supporting a path to citizenship and speaking at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. "He's going to focus on how his vision and his perceptions of the situations the U.S. faces fit with their interests."

Although his office was being tight lipped about its specifics, Paul's spokeswoman Moira Bagley said the speech will include discussion of mandatory minimum sentencing laws, school choice, "as well as inclusion in the party and reaching out to a broader group of people," all of which already have significant support within the black community.

Additionally, Paul isn't going into this speech blind: according to sources, he's spoken with members of the Congressional Black Caucus to fine tune his message. "He's spoken a lot with the Congressional Black Caucus as well," Bagley said. After the speech, Paul will take questions from the students in Howard's School of Business auditorium.

The speech comes during an inclusion push by the Republican Party that has featured an increase in outreach to minorities, with the recognition that the electorate has changed — and so, too, must the party. The appearance by Paul at Howard will resemble the many college appearances his father Ron Paul has made to adoring crowds — but instead of young, mostly white and mostly male libertarians, the audience will be mostly composed of young African-Americans, a segment of the population that voted overwhelmingly for Obama in 2012.

Paul is coming off a season of increased hype surrounding him as a senator and his prospects in 2016, spurred by his splashy 13-hour filibuster on drones, which brought Washington together in a rare moment of left-right unity on an issue. Like his father, he appeals to a slightly younger demographic of Internet-savvy 20-somethings.

But so far, Republican efforts to reach out to the African-American community have been shaky. Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus failed to convince residents of East New York, Brooklyn, during a listening tour stop there, and as BuzzFeed wrote last month, some RNC staffers have mocked minority outreach efforts with a symbolic "pander bear."

Sixty percent of voters between 18 and 30 voted for President Obama in the last election, compared with 36 percent who voted with Mitt Romney. Meanwhile, 93 percent of African-American voters went for Obama, as Republican turnout models that predicted a smaller black turnout than 2008 were proved to be wrong. Paul's speech is taking place in a particularly tough room. But, his aides said, he doesn't want to appear to pander, and won't alter the basics of his libertarian ethos, which they believe could more potential to appeal to non-Republicans than does that of his more establishment-minded peers.

"I would think it's fairly unique," the adviser said of Paul's appearance at Howard. "It's challenging to go into any place where 95 percent of the people voted for the other side. But you have to go and make the case. Clearly, you can slice electorates a lot of ways. But I don't think that it's a question of what demographic group a particular set of voters are in. I'm sure there'll be skeptics, but civil liberties are clearly resonating with people."

Operatives from both camps during the bitter primary fight say all is forgiven. “The comments I get a third of the time, at least, are apologies,” says a Clintonite.

Image by Jim Watson / Getty Images

In 2008, to many in her own party, Hillary Clinton was "more of the same"; she was a walking reminder of the "failed politics of the past," of the "same old Washington politics"; she was untrustworthy, she was divisive, she was maybe even racist; she was, according to Barack Obama's campaign advisor Samantha Power, a "monster" with no qualms about "stooping to anything"; and for a few days of fever-pitch cable news segments, after Clinton fumbled a reference to Bobby Kennedy's mid-campaign assassination 40 years earlier, she was even a conspirator, hopeful her opponent might meet the RFK fate and clear the way for her victory in the hard-fought Democratic primary.

Four years later, the onetime opponents have worked side by side as president and secretary of state, but a crucial question has lingered: Was the vitriol that Obama supporters hurled at Clinton in 2008 a simple case of high-octane campaign rhetoric, or did it reflect enduring Democratic misgivings that could follow her to the next presidential race?

Interviews with a range of Democrats in both camps suggest all is forgiven.

"The comments I get a third of the time, at least, are apologies," said a Democratic operative who supported Clinton in 2008. "They say, 'I'm sorry, I believed the stereotypes, I believed the attacks.'"

"Not a week goes by when someone hears about my affiliation with Hillary Clinton that they don't say, 'I've really come around on her. I supported Barack Obama in 2008, and I'd vote for her today,'" the operative added. "Not a week goes by where people don't say that."

Both campaigns went negative in part from the beginning; in Iowa, during the first caucus of the primary season, Clinton balked at Obama's slogan, arguing that "'change' is just a word," and Obama cast Clinton's campaign as calculating and "poll-driven."

But the attacks against the former First Lady had a way of sticking.

As early as January, Bill Clinton got his wife into hot water for a remark he made about the Obama "fairy tale," which former Clinton advisor Donna Brazile famously evoked as racist; and as race became an increasingly pivotal issue on the trail, the suggestion hung like a specter over Clinton's campaign until the end. Later in the primary, a March 2008 survey by Gallup found Clinton was rated last behind Obama and Republican nominee John McCain as a candidate who is "honest and trustworthy," who shares the "values" of Americans, and whom voters "would be proud to have as president." By the near-end of the campaign, some weeks after Samantha Power made the "monster" comment that would end her involvement with the Obama campaign, Bill Clinton was out on the stump in West Virginia saying he didn't "give a rip about all this name-calling."

But Bonnie Campbell, a former Iowa attorney general who served as a Clinton surrogate during the primary, said there isn't a "shred of contempt of any sort" in the crucial caucus state between Democrats who were split four years ago between the two candidates. The attacks directed against Clinton, said Campbell, were "purely strategic for the moment."

"No thoughtful person would believe now or then that either Clinton is racist," said Campbell, who is now a political consultant at the Iowa-based firm Link Strategies. "At the time, people felt very strongly. Iowans know the significance of the role we play, and we give it 100%, but when it's over, it's over."

Obama's Iowa state director in 2008, Jackie Norris, agreed that the state is "infamous for its bitter political battles — you pivot and you move on, and that's just how it works," she said, but joked that she and friends from the Clinton campaign "maybe don't talk so much anymore, sure."

Asked if she regretted any of the Obama campaign's attacks against Clinton during the primary, Norris said, "I'm not sure it does anybody any good to go back and say what you would take back and what you would change. You just have to look forward."

Norris, though, did argue that if Clinton runs in 2016, she may need to contend again with characterizations of her candidacy as old-guard. (In a single television ad, the Obama campaign hit Clinton on the issue twice, arguing that she offered "more of the same old negative politics" and "the same old Washington politics that won't fix our problems.")

"I do think there is still a case to be made for the next generation," said Norris, who went on to serve as First Lady Michelle Obama's chief of staff.

But for that critique to work again, said Kyle Kondik of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, a formidable and serious young candidate would need to emerge in the Democratic field.

"There was a lot of anger by a lot of Democrats, particularly among younger voters who were really put off by the Clintons, and we saw that in the old-versus-new divide," said Kondik, noting that Clinton's wide margin of victory in the right-leaning West Virginia, where she nabbed 67% of the vote, was proof positive that Clinton resonated more with the old than young. "But for it to happen now would depend on whether there's a messenger in the field who could make that argument, and I don't see that person on the scene right now."

"It does seem like the attack lines from 2008 wouldn't be all that operative" this time around, Kondik added.

Mark Daley, who served as Clinton's Iowa communications director before moving on to other states, said that the two camps were able to reconcile and work together after Obama became the clear nominee. "Once she was removed from the equation, we were all able to unite behind one candidate," he said, but added that some Democrats may feel a current "buyer's remorse" with the president that would only help Clinton in 2016.

Clinton's four years as secretary of state, added Campbell, allowed more Democratic voters to "really get to know her."

"The primary may have seemed bitter, but I've been through other caucus battles that were every bit as bitter — only these two individuals rose above that and forged a partnership," Campbell said. "Now that all that is gone, I know many Obama supporters who are fervently hoping that Hillary Clinton runs for president."

Early Obama voters, Norris agreed, won't be obdurate in getting behind Clinton's candidacy if she decides to run.

"I'm sure there are some old feelings that aren't going to go away," said Norris, "but the political landscape has shifted so much that I just don't see it as an insurmountable issue."

Be vewwwy, vewwwy qwiet.

This week, we saw heightened warmongering rhetoric from North Korea.

Via: Tumblr.com

But the internet here:

Via: Tumblr.com

And here:

Via: Tumblr.com

Responded like this:

View Entire List ›

The Republican congressman tells Morning Joe that he thinks there's a “workable solution.”

View Video ›

Sodomy, zygotes, and welfare, oh my.

Jon Stewart railed against questionable moves by very conservative state politicians around the country in a segment called, "Sodomy! Zygotes! Welfare!"

First stop was Virginia where Republican candidate for governor Ken Cuccinelli opposes oral and anal sex.

View Entire List ›

Sen. Manchin's office said Wednesday morning that the gun lobby was “neutral” on their bill. But an NRA statement released on the heels of a Manchin press conference says background checks don't work. [Updated]

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WVA)

Image by Gary Cameron / Reuters

As Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania prepare to roll out a bill on expanded background checks for gun purchases Wednesday morning, the National Rifle Association has been in talks with both senators, but remains neutral on the deal, according to Manchin's office.

"The NRA has not said either way," said Katie Longo, Manchin's press secretary. "The senators have been talking to the NRA, but they're still neutral."

Longo told BuzzFeed Wednesday that the brokered bipartisan bill — which would expand background checks for all commercial sales, including gun shows and internet sales — was completed early this morning, after staffers worked "pretty late into the night," said Longo.

The bill, which includes a record-keeping requirement but not for "a national registry," is likely President Barack Obama's last shot at passing a crucial segment of the sweeping gun control reform he called for after the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, last year.

Manchin, a Democrat, and Toomey, a Republican, are both A-rated members of the NRA, and have been working together on a deal after Manchin's negotiations with Republican Sen. Tom Coburn fell through last month. But Cobrun and Sen. Mark Kirk, said Longo, "may still have some input" as negotiations move forward.

"Once they propose this amendment," said Longo, "they still realize that they need to work with other senators and their colleagues."

Manchin and Toomey are scheduled to speak about the bill at a press conference Wednesday morning.

Update: After this article was published, the NRA issued the following statement:

Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not keep our kids safe in schools. While the overwhelming rejection of President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg's "universal" background check agenda is a positive development, we have a broken mental health system that is not going to be fixed with more background checks at gun shows. The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the tragedies in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson. We need a serious and meaningful solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago, addresses mental health deficiencies, while at the same time protecting the rights of those of us who are not a danger to anyone. President Obama should be as committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for the acts of psychopathic murderers.

In a new memoir, Ezekiel Emanuel shows that his brothers' ruthlessness was homegrown.

According to his older brother Ezekiel, the author of the new book Brothers Emanuel: A Memoir of an American Family, Ari Emanuel was a dyslexic who struggled in school and later in life had trouble reading "book proposals or scripts for plays and movies" — an interesting thing for an older brother to note about one of the most successful Hollywood agents of all time. In high school, Ari, whose sexy career inspired eight seasons of the HBO show Entourage, enjoyed the "streaking fad" too much, according to the eldest. "Whatever the reason," Ezekiel writes about the youngest of the family, "exposing oneself was the thing to do."

He's no less ready to embarrass his other brother, Rahm, middle child, political hitman, former White House chief of staff, and current, controversial mayor of Chicago: Ezekiel spends a dozen or so pages documenting Rahm's teenage obsession with ballet, which, Ezekiel reports, Rahm was "ridiculed" for, especially when Rahm was spotted "in tights." (Thanks for bringing it up again, older brother!) Though all three boys received formal ballet training, Ari and Zeke dropped out after learning the first through fifth positions, while Rahm continued to dance for another six years.)

But that's not so surprising in a book in which Ezekiel (known as Zeke), who formally trained as a bioethicist, approaches his family as a scientific subject while draping his siblings in the epic drama of family myth — while avoiding any insider dirt or insights into the halls of power in Washington or the WME boardroom. Instead — and possibly just as juicily — he offers detailed psychological portraits of his siblings that explain how the men came into power today and why they continue get away with behaving in their trademark obnoxious, abrasive, and at times, endearingly outrageous manner. "Little boys have always been fascinated by fighting and they seem almost biologically driven to act out elaborate mock battles complete with imaginary wounds and melodramatic deaths," writes the doctor.

This insight applies to the modus operandi of the Emanuel adults today, with the mega-deal a substitue for combat. Political and business foes vanquished, the wolf always at the door, the incessant struggle to obtain and maintain power. The main difference is that the brothers now have a national stage for their melodramas, with real lives, money, and values at risk. (Classic recent example: Ari Emanuel writing a letter to NBC to complain that Brian Williams' questions were too hard — after the interview had aired.) And it's here that we find the red meat the readers came for, the older brother's revenge: a meticulous accounting of all his younger siblings' flaws, not to mention a sense of the aggressive horseplay and hints of bullying tendencies among the siblings. As a teenager, Rahm was once almost late for a ballet class because he had tied "Ari up and left him in the closet." Meanwhile, even as a child, Ari was "perfectly suited for a business where relationships matter more than anything else," Ezekiel writes.

The gold standard for the contemporary political literary memoir is Barack Obama's Dreams from My Father — a sometimes fictionalized account of the president's life that nonetheless manages to ring true. While Obama often comes off as a Waspy Evelyn Waugh without a sense of humor, Ezekiel's literary ancestors are Saul Bellow and Philip Roth, and the Emanuel family itself seems to emerge from the pages of a Roth novel, the kind of neighborhood family a young Nathan Zuckerman would observe closely in both Newark and Chicago. Close family members escaped the Holocaust only to be scarred by violence in what was then British-controlled Palestine. (The brothers' uncle was killed in fighting between the Arabs and British in the 1930s.)

Ezekiel gives us a seat at the kitchen table that raised the three agile, arrogant, and ambitious minds who have reached the heights of power on both coasts and the nation's heartland. At one such dinner-table discussion in 1966, their mother, Marsha, clashed with their grandfather, known as "Big Bang-ah," a nickname derived from his habit of slamming his "big sausage hand" down on the table. Within these anecdotes, we find the origins of the style for which these brothers are now known: the expletives, threats of violence, bullying, stubbornness, uncompromising drive, and commitment to Democratic Party politics.

In this instance, the argument at dinner was over a Senate candidate: Marsha wanted to vote for an anti-war Republican in the upcoming '66 election, a Rockefeller-like moderate named Charles Percy. Percy opposed the war in Vietnam, which was just becoming unpopular. The Democratic candidate for Senate and incumbent was a war supporter, who'd adopted the position most Johnson and Kennedy Democrats had at that time. Percy, though, would tap into the early anti-war energy — energy that would later fuel the candidacy of Eugene McCarthy, the man Marsha and the boys would support in 1968 for president.

Marsha informed the grandfather she was going to support Percy. The grandfather responded: "If you are going to vote for that man... then get out of my fucking house!" Marsha did, slamming the door on the way out. Later, at the polling booth, she pulled the lever for all Democratic candidates — except for her Senate choice, Percy. Nine-year-old Ezekiel, with her and his two brothers in the polling booth, noticed.

"Mom," he screamed, "you can't vote for Percy!"

Marsha's response? She slapped him and pulled the lever for the Republican, defying the grandfather and son's wishes. "You could speak with intense passion, even insult your opponent, and no one took it too seriously or personally," writes Emanuel about his family's way of conflict resolution. "Just nodding and smiling when someone expressed views was the ultimate insult." He explained: "It was easier to punch or hug or kiss someone than to struggle to elucidate and articulate the nuances of our private feelings and emotions." And, it turns out, Marsha proved to have good moral and political instincts in taking a stand against the Vietnam War early: Percy upset his Democratic opponent by a large margin.

View Entire List ›

“I don't believe that all these ideas are optimal,” the president says.

President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks about his proposed fiscal 2014 federal budget, Wednesday, April 10, 2013, in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington.

Image by Charles Dharapak / AP

WASHINGTON — President Obama took a moment during his Rose Garden statement formally announcing his budget plan Wednesday to try and calm the frayed nerves of liberals upset over his proposal to cut entitlements as part of a bargain with Republicans.

"My budget does also contain the compromise I offered Speaker Boehner at the end of last year," Obama said, hinting at the so-called "chained CPI" cut to Social Security benefits. "I don't believe that all these ideas are optimal, but I'm willing to accept them as part of a compromise. If and only if they contain protections for the most vulnerable Americans."

Senior administration officials have noted that Obama's version of chained CPI exempts the poor from changes to their security benefits. So far, that fact hasn't changed some progressives' skepticism. On Tuesday, several prominent liberal groups — led by independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont — protested Obama's entitlement proposal in front of the White House.

In the Rose Garden, Obama suggested critics on the left follow his plan to reform entitlements or get stuck with a Republican plan they might like a lot less, such as the proposals written by Rep. Paul Ryan in the Republican-controlled House.

"The truth is, for those like me who deeply believe in our social insurance programs, think it's one of the core things that our government needs to do, if we want to keep Medicare working as well as it has, if we want to preserve the ironclad guarantee that Medicare represents, then we're going to have to make some changes," Obama said. "But they don't have to be drastic ones. And instead of making drastic ones later, what we should be doing is making some manageable ones now."

"The reforms I'm proposing will strengthen Medicare for future generations without undermining that ironclad guarantee that Medicare represents," Obama said.

Progressives are convinced their warning of Democratic primary fights means Obama's plans will ever get near a bill on the floor of Congress.

"I don't think he's going to get a chained CPI in this thing," Jim Dean, brother of Howard Dean and one of the leaders of Tuesday's progressive protest told BuzzFeed. "I honestly at this point don't see how anybody would be dumb enough to vote for something like this on either side of aisle. So I don't think we're going to have it and frankly the sooner he puts it behind him the sooner he can get on with the good stuff."

Paul's speech at the historically black college didn't get a lot of converts, but the students were glad to listen.

Image by Aron Heller, FILE / AP

WASHINGTON — Senator Rand Paul's speech at Howard University certainly didn't recruit a lot of new Republicans. But his openness in front of a tough crowd and receptiveness to students' questions earned him their begrudging respect — though some thought his lengthy explanation of civil rights history was "insulting," and the speech was interrupted at one point by protesters.

"I thought that it was really brave of Rand Paul to come to Howard University knowing that the audience would be African-American Democrats who are big supporters of Barack Obama," said Chris Kirkpatrick, a sophomore from Cleveland. "It's taking that first step, coming to Howard to show us what the Republican Party is trying to do in the next coming years."

Kirkpatrick said he votes Democratic, but "it was a good start for me to see what more Republicans have to say."

The speech, which included discussion of school choice and mandatory minimum sentencing laws, went over badly at times, like when Paul got former Senator Edward Brooke's name wrong, and was even interrupted by two protesters holding a sign that said "Howard University does not support white supremacy." Applause was scarce, and there were one or two instances of booing. Questioners in the question-and-answer session pressed Paul on voter I.D. laws and his past stated opposition to the Civil Rights Act, though some showed a kinship with him on other civil liberties issues like drug policy.

Sope Aluko, a sophomore from Maryland, said, "I thought it was really interesting that he was trying to appeal to us."

"Maybe he didn't really tell us anything new," Aluko said, noting that she was "taken aback" when Paul asked the audience if they knew that the NAACP was founded by Republicans (the question was met with a resounding "Yes!").

But Aluko said she liked what Paul had to say about keeping first time drug offenders out of prison.

"I feel a little bit better about him now," said Tasia Hawkins, a freshman from New York. "It was cute that he tried to research and show that he knows black history."

Hawkins is "indifferent" toward Paul, she said, but added that she appreciates that he tried to clarify his stance on the Civil Rights Act.

"It says something, that he was able to come to Howard," Hawkins said. She still doesn't plan to vote Republican any time soon.

One student, political science major Shakei Haynes, said he was convinced enough by Paul's speech that he would consider voting for him. Haynes voted for Obama in the last two presidential elections.

"I think he did a fantastic job relating to us," Haynes said. "I think he brought a message that was very informative."

Other students were more skeptical.

"In all honesty, he just reinforced the opinions I already have of the party in general," said Brandon Patterson, a sophomore economics major from Chicago. Patterson asked a tough question of Paul during the question-and-answer session.

Patterson said Paul did not address how the Republican Party would really include minorities, even though that was the stated goal of the speech, and "that was what I came to hear."

Diamond Flowers, a freshman from Baltimore, accused Paul of being "insulting" when he devoted a large part of his speech to civil rights history — a topic in which Howard students are better-versed than he is.

"I felt like he researched that a day before he came here," Flowers said. "It was like he was assuming that we didn't know about it."

Flowers has no plans to stop voting Democratic.

The former Obama senior campaign adviser turned MSNBC pundit sees Democrats siding more with Marco Rubio's pace for reform.

View Video ›

“It's not an Irish cause, a Hispanic cause, a cause of any one group. It's an American cause,” Rep. Joe Kennedy says.

Image by Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — As tens of thousands of immigration reform activists decended on Washington Wednesday, a group of Irish-American lawmakers threw their weight behind comprehensive reform.

"My grandfather served in World War One and earned his citizenship," Rep. Joe Crowley said, pointing to the tens of thousands of Irish immigrants in New York, Chicago and other parts of the country.

Although the estimated 50,000 undocumented Irish workers in the country is a miniscule part of the 11 million total undocumented workers living here, the Irish are a key demographic, particularly in the industrial Midwest where both parties have courted them for years.

Flanked by dozens of Latino activists, the lawmakers argued that while the immigration has focused on Hispanics it's effects can be felt in other communities. "While this issue frequently focuses on the South West of America, the truth is there's a whole other dimension" to immigration reform, Rep. Richard Neal argued.

"Think of those families who can never return to Ireland if a loved one dies … they can never go to a first communion or confirmation for fear of not returning" to the U.S.

Bipartisan groups in the House and Senate appear close to wrapping up work on a massive overhaul of the nation's immigration system that would provide an eventual pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers while reforming the legal immigration system. The Senate group is expected to announce a deal later this week, and floor action is expected sometime this month.

“If you believe in the Bible, one would have to say the Great Flood is an example of climate change. That certainly wasn't because man had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy.”

View Video ›

Image by

A Republican Congressman cited the biblical flood as an example of climate change that had not been caused by humans. Texas Rep. Joe Barton made those remarks Wednesday at the Subcommittee on Energy and Power hearing on H.R. 3, the Northern Route Approval Act, a bill that would give Congress the authority approve the Keystone pipeline.

"I don't think it's a secret that I'm a proponent and supporter of the Keystone pipeline," Barton said.

Barton continued to say he didn't deny the climate was changing, but argued that the change was due to natural causes, as he has in the past.

"I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don't deny that climate is changing," he added. "I think you can have an honest difference of opinion of what's causing that change without automatically being either all in that's all because of mankind or it's all just natural. I think there's a divergence of evidence."

Barton then cited the biblical Great Flood as an example of climate change not caused by man.

"I would point out that if you're a believer in the Bible, one would have to say the Great Flood is an example of climate change and that certainly wasn't because mankind had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy."

Anthony Weiner is part of a select group that also includes porn star Mary Carey.

Created with Gliffy.

Anthony Weiner, who recently voiced his interest in running for New York City mayor in a lengthy New York Times Magazine profile, isn't the only candidate whose private parts have become public. He shares that honor with porn stars Mary Carey, who ran for governor of California in 2003, and Mimi Miyagi, who ran for governor of Nevada in 2006. Weiner is the only one of the three to have suggestive images unintentionally released, however. Miyagi and Carey were open about their histories in porn — Miyagi, who ran as a Republican, reportedly said, "I have nothing left to hide. [...] My slogan is, 'I'm bare and honest at all times.'"

The chart above is not exhaustive. And some seemingly likely contenders didn't qualify. Perhaps most disappointingly, Levi Johnston, who posed for Playgirl, did not actually follow through with his plan to run for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

He thinks he's UN-stoppable, huh?

So, Kim Jong-un has announced that he will be firing a missile today.

Via: Tumblr.com

Leading the civilized world to ask:

Via: Tumblr.com

Here is a list of potential people who will kick his ass if he does.

Via: Tumblr.com

Chuck Norris.

Image by Frazer Harrison / Getty Images

View Entire List ›

“We’re going to make sure that this is prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” McConnell aide Jesse Benton says of Juddgate.

Image by Gary Cameron / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's campaign is working with the FBI as it investigates whether Democrats illegally taped a closed door strategy session, campaign officials said Wednesday.

McConnell Tuesday called on the FBI to launch an investigation into a tape recording of a strategy session on how to deal with a potential Ashley Judd campaign that was first obtained by Mother Jones.

In a radio interview with Mike Huckabee, McConnell campaign aide Jesse Benton said: "The FBI is taking this very seriously. They were at our office for about an hour today. They tell us that they're running down some leads."

"We're very glad that the FBI is so quick to address this … we're going to make sure that this is prosecuted to the full extent of the law," Benton said.

Although Benton declined to comment more fully, a source familiar with the situation said that during a meeting with investigators the campaign discussed the incident and turned over relevant materials to the FBI.

The source declined to provide specifics, but if the campaign does have evidence that Democrats or other opponents bugged McConnell's office, that could prove damaging to any Democratic candidate in Kentucky. And the suggestions of improprieties have already done as much political damage as the mildly embarrassing recording.

“America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms.”

Source: youtube.com

Even Al-Qaeda was arguing that America's background check system was weak and made guns easily obtainable. In a video released in 2011, Adam Gadahn an American-born spokesman for Al Qaeda argued guns could be easily obtained by buying guns at a gun shows where there would not be a background check.

Gadahn was calling on Muslims living in the United States to carry out terrorist acts similar to the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks in India.

"Let's take America as an example," Gadahn said. "America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?"

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said Wednesday the bi-partisan background check bill he put together with Republican Senator Pat Toomey would close the gun show loophole by adding background checks to private purchases made at shows.

Toomey said in a 2010 Senate debate he supported a better background check system to combat terrorists getting weapons in America but added "I would not support restricting the rights of law abiding citizens, however."

View Video ›

Image by

An emotional FLOTUS talks about Hadiya Pendleton in Chicago.

View Video ›

WASHINGTON — Michelle Obama urged Congress to pass gun control legislation in Chicago Wednesday, getting emotional as she talked about the impact of gun violence on one victim made famous by the second Obama inauguration.

Obama "took a rare step for any first lady into the legislative fight of the hour" when she echoed her husband's line that gun control proposals "deserve a vote," according to the Washington Post's Phil Rucker.

Then the First Lady talked about Hadiya Pendleton, the 15-year-old shot and killed in Chicago just days after participating in a presidential inauguration parade in Washington. Obama attended Pendleton's funeral earlier this year. It was clear from Obama's speech Wednesday that the Pendleton shooting had an emotional impact on Obama.

"Hadiya's family was just like my family. Hadiya Pendleton was me. And I was her. But I got to grow up," Obama said. "Hadiya's family did everything right, but she still didn't have a chance."

“What an incredible day for equality and basic dignity,” the state's only out gay lawmaker says.

Via: facebook.com

Montana's only out gay lawmaker, Rep. Bryce Bennett, tweeted that the state house voted to repeal the state's sodomy law Wednesday.

Although Bennett's shot of the vote screen shows only 64 votes in favor, Bennett notes that Republican Rep. Steve Lavin "added his yes vote later."

"What an incredible day for equality and basic dignity," Bennett wrote on Facebook.

The Senate already passed the bill, so it will now go to Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, whose office told BuzzFeed Tuesday the governor does not generally comment on pending legislation. Bullock has been supportive of some LGBT rights so he is expected to sign it.

Although the law had been held unconstitutional by the state's Supreme Court in 1997, efforts to remove the law from the books had never succeeded before this session.

Talking to BuzzFeed Tuesday, Bennett said, "Folks have been trying to pull this language from our statute in Montana since 1991, so this has been a long time coming ...."

Looking ahead, he added, "While it's exciting that we got this point ... we've got a number of steps to take forward before we can tackle other issues to make sure everyone in our state is truly equal."

The final vote to repeal the law Wednesday came almost precisely 16 years after the justices of the state's Supreme Court heard the arguments on April 11, 1997, in the case in which they ended up ruling the law unconstitutional.

Five of six House members said they still opposed gay marriage, while Congressman's Aaron Schock's office wouldn't return requests for comment.

Image by Daily Herald, Bill Zars, File / AP

Mark Kirk's fellow members of the Illinois congressional delegation aren't rushing to follow his shift to endorse marriage equality. The Senator announced he supported same-sex marriage ina post on his blog last Monday.

Rep. Peter Roskam of Illinois's 6th congressional district told NBC Chicago last week he respects Mark Kirk's decision but disagrees with it.

Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois's 15th congressional district told WRSP in Illinois, "There's a push for some reason to get votes on the record. I mean, my faith tradition is that marriage is between man and a woman. Sometimes I take offense when the government tries to intrude on that aspect on people of faith. Let Senator Kirk be Senator Kirk and I'll be Congressman Shimkus. This is one where we will disagree."

A spokesman for Rep. Randy Hultgren of Illinois's 14th district said he voted to reaffirm DOMA and is opposed to gay marriage.

A spokesman for Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois's 16th district said, "Congressman Kinzinger personally believes marriage is between a man and a women, and that it is an issue to be decided at the state level."

A spokesman for Rep. Rodney Davis, who represents Illinois's 13th congressional district said, "Congressman Davis is opposed to gay marriage. As he has stated before, he is supportive of civil unions to ensure that everyone has equal protections under the law."

Rep. Aaron Schock's office did not return repeated emails and calls requesting comment, but in January when a reporter asked why he didn't support gay marriage, he responded, "I just haven't."

After weeks of wooing the gun lobby, Manchin fumbles the unveiling of his background checks proposal and draws heat from the NRA.

Image by Gary Cameron / Reuters

Weeks of reported negotiations between the National Rifle Association and Sen. Joe Manchin over legislation to expand background checks hit a roadblock Wednesday after the West Virginia Democrat unveiled his bill amid confusion over whether or not the powerful gun lobby would support the measure.

The compromise brokered this week by Manchin and Republican Sen. Pat Toomey to require checks on all commercial gun sales is a rare bipartisan deal that could very well become law. But whatever progress Manchin might have made in recent weeks to get the NRA on board was undermined by bungled messaging that publicly pitted the two parties against one another.

In advance of a press conference to unveil the legislation, a spokesperson in Manchin's office told BuzzFeed that the NRA remained "neutral" on the bill.

"The NRA has not said either way," said Katie Longo, Manchin's press secretary. "The senators have been talking to the NRA, but they're still neutral."

When the news first hit Twitter, it was widely interpreted as a positive sign for the legislation. Without opposition from the NRA, pro-gun Republicans would be given cover to vote for the popular measure.

Later Wednesday morning, Manchin appeared to confirm the NRA's tacit cooperation in his and Toomey's scheduled press conference, saying he was in "constant dialogue" with the group, but added, "I cannot tell you what their position is."

But just minutes after Manchin took his last question, the lobbying group released a statement — headline: "Statement from the National Rifle Association Regarding Toomey-Manchin Background Check Proposal" — that disavowed background checks broadly, but did not make a clear ruling either way on the bill itself.

"Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting," it read. Still, the NRA tacitly praised Manchin and Toomey for excluding personal gun transfers from the bill, calling the rejection of the "'universal' background check agenda" a "positive development."

Although the statement did not appear to directly contradict the claim from Manchin's office, it made clear enough to reporters that, despite prolonged dialogue over the background check measure, Manchin and the NRA were not in lock-step on the day of the legislation's reveal.

Asked to clarify their stance on the measure, NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told BuzzFeed, "We are opposed to Toomey/Manchin. Period." But Arulanandam did not respond to repeated requests, from this news outlet and others, as to whether the organization had plans to "score" the bill on its annual scorecard. (A negative rating from the group would do more than any statement to damage to the legislation's prospects with lawmakers who want to keep in good standing with the NRA.)

After it became clear that the NRA opposed the bill, another Manchin spokesperson told BuzzFeed that Longo's use of the word, "neutral," may have been misleading.

"She should not have said that," said Jonathan Kott, Manchin's communications director. "I guess technically it was correct at the time. They hadn't given a statement at that time, so I guess they were neutral."

But Kott added that Manchin plans to continue his talks with the NRA, despite their statement today against the bill. "He always talks to the NRA and has a great relationship with them, especially back in his state. Those lines of communication will always be open," he said.

Asked if the NRA had been open about their opposition to the measure during conversations with Manchin, Kott said only, "I wasn't involved in the talks." He added that he also had not heard whether the group plans to score the background checks bill.

Manchin, an A-rated member of the NRA from a right-leaning state, has been at the center of the push for new gun control legislation since well near the beginning: Three days after the shooting last December in Newtown, Connecticut, the longtime Second Amendment advocate went on MSNBC to say he planned to call his "friends" at the NRA to bring them to "the table."

After his colleagues in the Senate pushed left-leaning measures that couldn't garner Republican support — a ban on assault weapons was dropped in March after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he couldn't get more than 40 votes behind it — a Manchin plan for expanded background checks emerged as what is widely considered to be President Obama's last shot at significant gun control legislation.

The confusion Wednesday over the current state of negotiations may jeopardize Manchin's long effort to woo support from the NRA. But if he and Toomey are able to pass the bill in the face of the group's opposition, it will be a sign that the pro-gun giant's influence has faded in the face of the mass shootings in Newtown.

Manchin, said Kott, is optimistic the bill can succeed with or without the NRA.

"I think he feels that the NRA is an influential group and also a well informed group," said Kott. "Having their support would help [the bill], but he doesn't think that if he doesn't have their support it can't pass."

Update: In a letter released Wednesday evening, NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox said the organization is "unequivocally opposed" to the Manchin-Toomey bill, which he called a "misguided 'compromise.'"

"As we have noted previously, expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools," said Cox. "Given the importance of these issues, votes on all anti-gun amendments or proposals will be considered in NRA's future candidate evaluations."

If the legislation's current provisions are not modified, Cox added, the group will break with precedent and score a cloture vote on the bill to oppose it from proceeding on the Senate floor to final passage. (4/10/13, 9:45 p.m. EST)