DSK Resigns and Gets Bail, Some Dude Tries to Take Down Ron Paul, and Congress Soon to Vote on Extension of Patriot Act

Dominique Strauss-Kahn has stepped down today as head of the IMF, see this cool chart for those who may succeed him:

The China Central Bank has weighed in on the replacement:

BEIJING (MNI) - The new IMF leadership needs to reflect changes in the world economic order and be more representative of emerging market economies, Chinese central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan said Thursday in his first public comments since the arrest of Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
"The senior management team of the IMF should better reflect changes in world economic patterns and should be more representative of emerging market economies," he said.

New world order?  Surely there was a better phrase that could have been used, though it is apt.  And of course we have new evidence coming out on DSK's alleged sexual exploits:

Kristin Davis said she provided young women for the IMF chief in 2006, as he ran for the French Socialists' presidential nomination, and that one complained about his "aggressive" behaviour.

"He was a client of my agency," she told The Daily Telegraph. "When men abuse women I'm no longer going to protect their identities".

Mr Strauss-Kahn, 62, has been charged with sexually attacking a 32-year-old hotel maid at the Manhattan Sofitel on Saturday. He denies the claims and is being held in Rikers Island prison.

Miss Davis, 35, who claims to have a long list of celebrity clients, said Mr Strauss-Kahn called her directly on her mobile phone and paid $1,200 cash for two-hour sessions in hotel rooms.

"He wanted an 'All-American girl', with a fresh face, from the mid-West," she said. "A girl in January 2006 complained he was rough and angry, and said she didn't want to see him again".

Remember that Ms. Davis also supplied call-girls to Eliot Spitzer.  I should also note that DSK was granted bail to the tune of $1 million with a $5 million insurance bond.  Am I the only one who thinks a member of the socialist party being able to afford such a sum is kind of ironic?

In the lighter side of news (as if DSK getting the same call girls as Eliot Spitzer is not light) some dude from the Salon blog has a post criticizing Ron Paul for his hypocritical view on the Constitution and the founding fathers.  Tom Woods handles it perfectly, so I won't elaborate too much.  Basically the guy, Paul J. O'Rourke (I don't think it is the awesome P.J. O'Rourke, but if it is, I am disappointed) claims the Constitution wasn't written in the libertarian tradition (no shit) and that libertarian policies caused the 2008 financial crisis.  That claim alone throws his whole argument out the window for obvious reasons.  To those who need enlightened still, yes, the founders were far from perfect.  Some wanted a large centralized government, others didn't.  It was a fight between the Hamiltonian point of view and the Jeffersonian.  Needless to say, Hamilton won in the end.  I used some of my remaining printing quota to print off Gary North's Conspiracy in Philadelphia which I hope to read over the summer.  The book supposedly outlines the kind of shady deals done during the Constitutional Convention and how many founding fathers benefits financially by ratifying it.

Here is some bad news as a deal has been reached to have a vote on an extension of the God-awful Patriot Act for four years:

WASHINGTON — Top congressional leaders agreed Thursday to a four-year extension of the anti-terrorist Patriot Act, the controversial law passed after the Sept. 11 attacks that governs the search for terrorists on American soil.
The deal between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner calls for a vote before May 27, when parts of the current act expire, according to officials in both parties who spoke on condition of anonymity. The idea is to pass the extension with as little debate as possible to avoid a protracted and familiar argument over the expanded power the law gives to the government.

So much for civil liberties.  Where the hell is the outrage on the left who hated this when Bush was in office? Why are Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich the only ones to give a shit about civil liberties?

I will end by highlighting some shots fired on Mitt Romney by Ron Paul:

Texas Rep. Ron Paul took issue with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s fundraising prowess, questioning whether Mr. Romney actually raised $10.5 million on Monday.

“He actually didn’t raise (that amount),” Mr. Paul said during a trip to Nevada. “I think he got $10 million in commitment. When our chart runs on the (website) ticker, it means the money’s in the bank.”

Nice try Mitt.

Update- Stole these two images from the latest post by James Altucher.  One is beautiful to look at, one isn't:

This isn't beautiful, I think Bristol was a lot prettier without her new plastic surgery.  She looks incredibly fake now, which is a huge turnoff for me.  I always thought she was rather beautiful before, but now it's just like, eh?
Now here is the beautiful image, which is actually a photo:

Unbelievable, but yeah, it is an actual photo.  I should also give a big thanks to James for e-mailing me a pdf of his new book How to Be the Luckiest Person Alive!.  One of these days I will get around to reading it.