'He's a Traitor' — Speaker John Boehner Interview with George Stephanopoulos on #Snowden and #NSA Surveillance

Memeorandum has it, "Transcript: Exclusive Interview With House Speaker John Boehner on NSA Leak, Immigration Reform and More."

And a roundup at the Note, "The Note: Edward Snowden Debate: Traitor or Hero?"

Apple Shows Hand for Staying on Top Through Innovation

At IBD, "Apple Shows Off iOS 7, iTunes Radio, Cylinder PC":

Apple (AAPL) on Monday responded to criticism that it isn't innovating enough by unveiling a revamped mobile operating system with a plethora of new features, a radically redesigned desktop computer, and an Internet radio service.

But the largely anticipated news failed to wow investors as shares dipped 0.7%.

At Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco, executives shared their latest products with 6,000 software developers in attendance.

The cylindrical Mac Pro desktop for creative professionals is the Apple's boldest design since the short-lived Power Mac G4 Cube more than a decade ago. The black, 9.9-inch tall PC looks like oversized 35-mm film canister. It is one-eighth the volume of the current Mac Pro. It also boasts much faster computing and graphics processing. Assembled in the U.S., the new Mac Pro will be available later this year.

"This is the future of the Pro desktop," marketing chief Phil Schiller said. "This is a machine unlike anything we've ever made both inside and out."

More at that top link

And Apple's iOS7 page is here. The new Mac Pro is here. And the "keynote" page is here.

And some responses, at GigaOM, "Much iOS 7 design inspiration came from others but Apple elegantly puts it all together."

Also at TechCrunch, "Design, And Insecurity, Is Back At Apple," and at the Verge, "The design of iOS 7: simply confusing." (Via Techmeme.)

#Snowden. Hero or Traitor?

It's complicated, but I'm more on the traitor side.

At USA Today, "Is Snowden a traitor or a public servant?"

How you view Edward Snowden probably has a lot to do with how much you care about the threat of terrorism and how much you care about online privacy.

Hero? Traitor? Or someone in between?

How you view Edward Snowden, who exposed two sweeping U.S. online surveillance programs, probably has a lot to do with which you fear more — terrorist bombers or government snoopers.

Snowden's admission that he was the one who'd released evidence of the top-secret programs — one of the most sensational leaks of classified material in U.S. history — expanded an already blistering debate over the clash between national security and online privacy.

With Snowden's assistance, The Guardian and The Washington Post have recently published a series of top-secret documents detailing the government surveillance programs. One gathers hundreds of millions of U.S. phone records while searching for possible links to suspected terrorists abroad; the second allows the government to tap into U.S. Internet companies' data to detect suspicious behavior that begins overseas.

Who is Ed Snowden? That depends on who's asking.

From Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg, whom Henry Kissinger called "the most dangerous man in America," to Wikileaks dumper Bradley Manning, on trial accused of high crimes, Americans' views of their whistle-blowers always have depended on their own personal politics.

"We've seen this again and again," said Stephen Kohn, director of the National Whistleblowers Center and a lawyer who has defended whistle-blowers.

He said public support for a whistle-blower usually is tied more to a political issue — the Vietnam War, in Ellsberg's case — than to the rights of whistle-blowers or the issue of whistle-blowing.

Kohn said some people who might support Snowden's actions in principle are so concerned about terrorism "they'll say, at the end of the day, you can't have civil servants or contractors acting in this way." Those primarily worried about online privacy are more sympathetic.

Well, I can relate to principle, although Snowden's a tool of the left --- and those people have been harming U.S. security since long before the war on terror. Screw 'em.

PREVIOUSLY: "Lt. Col. Ralph Peters: 'Bring Back the Death Penalty' for Traitors Like Edward Snowden."

Global Warming Plateau

See Yid With Lid, "NY Times: It's Not Getting Warmer, We Don't Know Why, But We SWEAR It's Going to Get Warmer Soon."

And Weasel Zippers, "NY Times Admits “Plateau” In Global Warming Over Last 15 Years…":

Al Gore hardest hit.

More from Tom Nelson, "Nice timing, Robert: Even as the New York Times acknowledges a puzzling "warming plateau", Redford tries to convince us that "Climate change is happening fast...Our weather is out of whack"."

Angry Leftists Defend Homosexual Parenting

Following up on my earlier entry, "Homosexual Parenting Harms Children."

It turns out the Gaystapo thugs swarmed the Los Angeles Times with angry letters.

See, "LETTERS ON LETTERS: Marriage and families":

Rebecca S. Hertsgaard of Palm Springs took personal offense at the letter:

"I am deeply offended at this fallacious argument regarding gay parenting and the fact that someone would believe that a child needs both a mother and a father, something gay parenting is unable to provide.

"A woman's 'role' in a marriage? A man's 'role'? Besides apparently ignoring the fact that many children are born without benefit of their parents being either married or together, Graham also apparently still believes the arcane notion that fathers can't provide 'softness' and mothers can't provide 'protection.' I raised my children alone for many years, and they thrived.

"I'm just outraged. And I'm not even gay."

More angry idiots at the link.

IMAGE CREDIT: iOTW, "Government Redefinition of Marriage is Not Inevitable."

Russia Weighs Asylum for #NSA Traitor Edward Snowden

The Guardian reports, "NSA leaks: Russia 'would consider' Edward Snowden asylum claim – live."

And Althouse has the Drudge juxtaposition, "Drudge at his best: "Wanna Come to Russia?'" (At Memeorandum.)

There's something very Cold War-ish about all of this.

PREVIOUSLY: "Lt. Col. Ralph Peters: 'Bring Back the Death Penalty' for Traitors Like Edward Snowden."

'That's just how it is for progressives. They want what they want, when they want it, and if you dare to protest their use of your money — then they’ll really make you pay...'

A fabulous essay, at the House of Eratosthenes, "Progressives: I’m Taking Your Ball and Going Home."

Caroline Glick at 2013 Jerusalem Post Conference

At BCF, "Caroline Glick Let's Fly at the 2013 Jerusalem Post Conference."

Baby Sea Lion Jumps Aboard Boat, Changes Sailor's Life

It's J.R. Gilkinson, off the coast of Newport Beach. The little sea lion made the most thrilling experience of his life.

At the New York Post, "Puppy love: Baby sea lion snuggles up with boater."

Julie Borowski on #NSA Surveillance

She's great:

2013 World Freestyle Round-Up Championships

Via Jim Goodrich on Facebook:

The website is here.

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters: 'Bring Back the Death Penalty' for Traitors Like Edward Snowden

Strong words:

Big Brother Really Is Watching Us

From Sen. Rand Paul, at the Wall Street Journal, "Monitoring hundreds of millions of phone records is an extraordinary invasion of privacy":

When Americans expressed outrage last week over the seizure and surveillance of Verizon's client data by the National Security Agency, President Obama responded: "In the abstract, you can complain about Big Brother . . . but when you actually look at the details, I think we've struck the right balance."

How many records did the NSA seize from Verizon? Hundreds of millions. We are now learning about more potential mass data collections by the government from other communications and online companies. These are the "details," and few Americans consider this approach "balanced," though many rightly consider it Orwellian.

These activities violate the Fourth Amendment, which says warrants must be specific—"particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." And what is the government doing with these records? The president assures us that the government is simply monitoring the origin and length of phone calls, not eavesdropping on their contents. Is this administration seriously asking us to trust the same government that admittedly targets political dissidents through the Internal Revenue Service and journalists through the Justice Department?

No one objects to balancing security against liberty. No one objects to seeking warrants for targeted monitoring based on probable cause. We've always done this.

What is objectionable is a system in which government has unlimited and privileged access to the details of our private affairs, and citizens are simply supposed to trust that there won't be any abuse of power. This is an absurd expectation. Americans should trust the National Security Agency as much as they do the IRS and Justice Department.

Monitoring the records of as many as a billion phone calls, as some news reports have suggested, is no modest invasion of privacy. It is an extraordinary invasion of privacy. We fought a revolution over issues like generalized warrants, where soldiers would go from house to house, searching anything they liked. Our lives are now so digitized that the government going from computer to computer or phone to phone is the modern equivalent of the same type of tyranny that our Founders rebelled against...

Continue reading.

And listen to the video after about 6 minutes especially. Hannity shows a bunch of clips featuring President Transparency's complete 180 degree spin on surveillance, wiretapping, the war on terror. You name it. This president is an epic liar and hypocrite.

Majority of Americans Supports Government Programs to Track Terrorists, Even at Risk of Privacy

At Pew Research, "Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic: Public Says Investigate Terrorism, Even IF It Intrudes on Privacy."

I don't have that big a problem with it. I'm just amazed that Obama expanded the program rather than wind it down, like he promised during the campaign. And there's a political fallout, that's what's going to be better for liberty. That said, I can appreciate the libertarian arguments. It's simply a matter of tradeoffs to me, and I'm willing to lean toward greater security.

Charles Krauthammer has more:

More at Memeorandum.

Europeans Demand Answers on Obama Administration's Secret Intelligence-Gathering Programs

Wow, the story keeps getting bigger and more complicated.

From the Guardian's lede tomorrow morning, "Obama pressured over NSA snooping as US senator denounces 'act of treason'":

Barack Obama was facing a mounting domestic and international backlash against US surveillance operations on Monday as the administration struggled to contain one of the most explosive national security leaks in US history.

Political opinion in the US was split with some members of Congress calling for the immediate extradition from Hong Kong of the whistleblower, Edward Snowden. But other senior politicians in both main parties questioned whether US surveillance practices had gone too far.

Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the national intelligence committee, has ordered the NSA to review how it limits the exposure of Americans to government surveillance. But she made clear her disapproval of Snowden. "What he did was an act of treason," she said.

Officials in European capitals demanded immediate answers from their US counterparts and denounced the practice of secretly gathering digital information on Europeans as unacceptable, illegal and a serious violation of basic rights. The NSA, meanwhile, has referred Snowden to the Justice Department, and said that it was assessing the damage caused by the disclosures.

Daniel Ellsberg, the former military analyst who revealed secrets of the Vietnam war through the Pentagon Papers in 1971, described Snowden's leak as even more important and perhaps the most significant leak in American history.

Yeah, and the idiot Ellsberg compares the U.S. to East Germany's "Stasi" regime. A nice touch from a traitor.

Change! Democrats Now Support Warrantless Eavesdropping by Two-Thirds Majority, Up by Nearly 30 Percent Since Bush/Hitler!

Again, you gotta love this.

At Pew:

64% of Dems now say NSA surveillance program acceptable; 36% said that when Bush was president pewrsr.ch/19ikCJS twitter.com/pewresearch/st…
— Pew Research Center (@pewresearch) June 10, 2013

Hypocrisy! MT @pewresearch 64% of Dems now say NSA surveillance program acceptable; 36% said that when Bush was pres. pewrsr.ch/19ikCJS
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) June 10, 2013

Well, folks gotta work out that cognitive dissonance somehow. What better way than to say, "Hey, trust us, our guy won't threaten freedom!"

Also at Commentary, "Obama’s Fans Try to Change the Subject."

Freakin' hypocrites. These people disgust me.

Holly Madison Goes For Saturday Morning Run in Sporty Pink Crop Top and Tiny Grey Athletic Shorts

Hey, she looks good too!

At London's Daily Mail, "Working off those pregnancy pounds in style! Holly Madison goes for a jog in cleavage-baring crop top and tiny shorts."

TPM's Josh Marshall Gets Hammered for 'Lining Up to Defend Obama Admin Surveillance...'

This just tickles the hell out of me.

Dear Leader's utter hypocrisy is causing crazy fits of apoplexy across the leftist fever swamps.

Instapundit posted this the other day, "HEY, RUBE! Americans Are Outraged Because in Voting for Obama, They Thought They Were Rejecting Bush." (Be sure to click through to the Daily Kos post at the link; the comments are gold!)

And now I see some interesting nuggets about Josh Marshall on Twitter:

Must say: pretty disappointed with former Lefty warriors against Bush Admin surveillance lining up to defend Obama Admin surveillance.
— Tom Belknap (@dragonflyeye) June 10, 2013

@dragonflyeye Who? I'm not seeing it on my end. But then again, maybe I stopped reading those people a while ago.
— Joseph A. Henderson (@josephenderson) June 10, 2013

@josephenderson In particular, Josh Marshall. Who I admit I'm ambivalent about as a commenter. Greenwald is now the enemy.
— Tom Belknap (@dragonflyeye) June 10, 2013

Yeah, I trolled through Marshall's Twitter feed. He's got two blog posts on Snowden, "Wow. Just Wow," and "What’s the Deal with Hong Kong?"

And he's getting called out by TPM regulars, "One of Many Dissenting Voices":

A threshold has been crossed while the public slept. Some light is finally being shined on the practices of our security apparatus. Maybe now, as the memory of Bin Laden fades, we are entering the first time since 9/11 when we can have a reasonable public conversation about the privacy interests of our people and what must be sacrificed in order to preserve the rights we cherish. It kills me to see people I respect, opinion leaders like yourself, collectively shrug at the revelations of these last several days.

Well, "shrugging" is how partisan hacks like Marshall protect "The One."

But read the whole thing. The perturbed reader hammers Marshall for questioning "Snowden as a messenger" rather than focusing on "the materials he has provided..."

Yeah, well, those materials aren't going over so well for President Transparency. But don't blame me. I voted for the other guy --- both times!

The Beach is Better in September

That's one thing I used to love about UCSB — classes didn't start until the end of September, which of course meant that school didn't cut into the prime beach time.

And right now, in June, it's more like this:

Bar Refaeli Stands Up for Transgender Pissing Rights!

She's an idiot.

I swear, some of the most beautiful people have absolutely no brains.

At the Times of Israel, "Give pee a chance: Refaeli stands up for gays … at a urinal."

Also at the Blaze, "THE ODD PHOTO SUPERMODEL BAR REFAELI SENT OUT TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR TRANSGENDER RIGHTS." Check the comments:

What about my right to privacy? I forgot, the gays and transsexuals have the power to DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. No need for privacy. Would you allow men into a bathroom with women? Why not? They would let a gay man – WHO IS sexually attracted to men – to stand beside a straight man at a urinal. Insane.

Hey, it's all the about teh gays.

PREVIOUSLY: "Government Redefinition of Marriage is Not Inevitable."