RedStateEclectic

Eclectic Musings

I haven’t given up blogging; it just seems like it sometimes.  So, before I head off to a meeting tonight, here is some raw footage of what’s rolling around in my brain right now:

• The U.S. educational system may be good at teaching people specific vocations, but it’s really not very good at teaching people (especially kids) how to love learning.  Grading midterm exams today, I find that there is a vast gulf in the grades on the objective questions between the “traditional” American students; the foreign students; and the “non-traditional” students.  The best grades are coming from the foreign students, followed closely by the non-traditional (older) students.  The body language of a few of the students in class seems to have a direct relationship to their grades (slumped over, napping, or doodling excessively on their notebooks seems to not be an indication of exceptional students who are bored).  I try to remind myself that this IS a community (2 year) college, and so, there may not be as many “serious students” there.  But…
• My daughter tells me that at her liberal arts college some of the students are very unhappy with having to take the “general ed” courses that are required for graduation: so many hours in the “arts” (Music Appreciation, Art Appreciation); some hours in either Philosophy or Religion; a minimal number of Social Science hours (as well as English, Math and Science credits).  It seems that the Arts and Humanities stuff really gets them worked up: “I’m a Math Major. Why not let me take more Math classes instead of wasting time with Music Appreciation?”  Somewhere along the line, it seems that we’ve convinced our students (and ourselves), that there’s no value in knowing a little bit about a lot of things, but rather, we should all become specialists.  I’m not sure that’s good for a society. 
• The weather here in Nebraska has been quite nice for early-mid November.  The weekend had temperatures into the 70s (and Nebraska beat Oklahoma on Saturday, which is a BIG deal around here); today we got into the 60s, and we’re supposed to stay like that through the week.  But since we got snow the first weekend of October, I don’t really see that as a sign of anything—just a nice warm spell before the nasty winter comes along.
• One of my reasons for being scarce around here is that I’ve not only been teaching, but have been continuing to engage the political system.  We need to start DOING, rather than talking.  In other words, Stop Dreaming (and while you’re at it, watch this remastered classic from 2007—in HD!).

Oh, and on the subject of “DOING”:

“Be Prepared for the Worst”

I believe that Ron Paul is the pre-eminent spokesman and philosopher of freedom today. 

There are folks asking whether he’s getting ready to run for President again in 2012.  I understand that desire—and I’m sure I’d be on the bandwagon again if he did, BUT, I think he’s more of a “John the Baptist”—preparing the way for someone who will emerge (perhaps someone we can’t even imagine right now—or perhaps for someone like a Gary Johnson) in the next year or so as the one who will carry the banner.  Accuse me of ageism, if you will, but honestly, Ron Paul (who is already 74 years old) doesn’t really need another Presidential run when he’s 77.  I don’t have any doubt that he would be capable, but I kind of think that by the time he gets to that point in his life, he’s entitled to not have to run all over the country scrounging for votes—unless he really wants to.  Now if he were 10 years younger, I’d be on the “Draft Ron Paul” bandwagon right now.

LLE

And the Winner Is…

Ron Paul.

Forget the spin and the slop. The real winner of the 2009 elections is the public official and candidate who has championed the core insurgency driving the election. It is Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul.

Paul embodies the anti-Washington, anti-tax, anti-big government, anti-financial insiderism viewpoints that are galvanizing large numbers of activists and voters. It is not a majority, but a majority has never been Ron Paul's goal. Paul is a conviction politician, an idea man, an advocate and a change agent….

…I agree with some things Paul says, and disagree with others, but the truth of the matter, politically, is that his agenda has moved center stage and his people are highly motivated and this is a serious movement that is underestimated and misunderstood by Washington insiders.

And then there’s this: the “most popular group” is “Ron Paul Republicans”; number 4 is “Back to Goldwater Republicans”.  I suspect there’s a lot of overlap in membership.  And I suspect that the Establishment folks are trying to figure out what to do about this—they opened the door, and the principled libertarian-conservatives walked right in.

LLE

We Will Not Back Down!

Fighting Words?

Some of our readers aren’t real keen on Ron Paul, but doesn’t he raise some valid questions?

The Shame of the South Confronted By Dr. Paul

Lew Rockwell gives a heads up on Ron Paul responding to innuendos made by that senator from my state who's no senator of mine(grrrrr):

Ron Paul will respond to the chinless vampire Lindsey Graham on CNN’s The Situation Room With Wolf Blitzer tonight at 6:00 pm Eastern, and also on MSNBC’s The Ed Show at 6:30 pm Eastern.

Also this from C4L's John Tate:

Last Monday night, Senator Lindsey Graham reiterated his disdain for Ron Paul and limited government conservatives at a town hall when he said that he was not going to allow the Republican Party to be “hijacked by Ron Paul.” Instead, he thinks we should get behind those who he tells us “can win,” even if it means abandoning every belief we hold dear in the process.

In addition to his afternoon appearance on Judge Napolitano’s Freedom Watch, Congressman Paul will be responding to the neoconservatives on The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer tonight at 6 pm eastern and also on MSNBC’s The Ed Show at 6:30 pm eastern.

CNN has shared with my staff that they want to hear from you on this issue.  Contact The Situation Room and let them know you think neoconservatism has had its day and it is time for our elected officials to stick to the Constitution.

How Graham retains his seat every six years is beyond me, other than the fact that he warmongers, which pleases many here in SC, sadly.

The “Ron Paul Cause”

Here’s an interesting video I stumbled upon the other day—watch at around 40 seconds, where Rep. Terry refers to the “Ron Paul Cause.”

Now, a little background information:

• Representative Terry is the 2nd District Republican Congressman in Nebraska (the 2nd District is unique, because while Terry won re-election in ‘08, Barack Obama won the district, and thus got one electoral vote from Nebraska—Nebraska and Maine are the only two states that allow a split of their electoral votes).  The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats are going to pull out the stops as they try to “prove” that the 2nd District is winnable for them, in this otherwise predominantly Republican state.
• Terry has voted “wrong” (as far as the Campaign fro Liberty is concerned) on several issues recently (see the bottom of the link)—including the bailout last year.  His “people” in Omaha seem to have a bit of a bone to pick with the Ron Paul crowd (although to his credit, he was the first of our Congressman to sign on to HR 1207)—I suspect that’s partially because we bumped a few of them as RNC delegates/alternates last summer.  That said, if you look at his voting history, he’s certainly not the worst thing we could have, and far better than some of the Republican Representatives around the country.
• As one who was (and is) intimately involved with the “Ron Paul Cause”, I found this particular comment very curious.  Terry’s primary opponent has never been involved with the Ron Paul cause, to the best of my knowledge.  Some of our 2nd District folks may be taking a serious look at Matt Sakalosky, who in many ways, sounds pretty “Paulian”—although certainly not perfectly so.  But in things I’ve heard him say, he strikes me as a “constitutional conservative with libertarian tendencies on economic issues.” 

So why did Congressman Terry refer to the “Ron Paul Cause” (whatever that is, or how he defines it), and say that challenging him would be bad for it?  Is he trying to give us friendly advice?  Is he threatening us?  Is he trying to smear Matt Sakalosky with that “crazy Paul people” juice?  Is he just mistaken and thinks that only a crazy Paul supporter would dare challenge a 6 term Congressman in the Primary?  Is he scared of “the Cause?”

I suspect that what we’re seeing here is indicative of the larger Republican Establishment.  People in Nebraska have occasionally blamed Ron Paul for John McCain’s loss to Obama.  Pfft.  There weren’t enough Ron Paul voters to make that kind of difference, and since the media shut Paul out most of the time during the primary season, I suspect that swing voters weren’t influenced to vote against John McCain because Ron Paul stayed nominally in the race until the primaries were over.

If Lee Terry ultimately wins the nomination (and the smart money would suggest that he will), and loses in the General Election, I suspect that it will be less because of damage that Sakalosky inflicted on him 6 + months before, and far more because his constituents judged that he is part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. (But it’s always nice to have a scapegoat, I guess).  On the other hand—as a non-resident of the 2nd District—it will be fun to watch where this Primary battle goes, and whether the challenger can get any traction while running what he promises will be an ideas based campaign.

LLE

And You Call Yourself A Congressman?

 

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Ron Paul
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

Wowie, Wow, Wow!

I come to you for forgiveness of my sins.  I have a Campaign for Liberty meeting in Kearney tomorrow to finish planning for.  I have a ton of other things to do.  And…I took my laptop along to my daughter’s piano lesson, but I did none of those very productive things.  You see, as I was walking out the door, our mail carrier was bringing an oversized package to my door.  In it, was my “express delivery”, pre-ordered, “For Liberty” 10-pack.

I had no choice.  Even though we are having the Nebraska “premier” in two weeks in Omaha with a group of us, I had to watch it.  All I can say, is “Wow!”  I enjoyed watching it, feeling that adrenaline flow like I did during the campaign, laughing at the crazy things that some of us did that it captured.  I got some new ideas (Laura and an idea can sometimes be a dangerous combination) for what we might do in Nebraska in the future.  And I’m thoroughly looking forward to a second viewing, with 75 or 100 (or maybe more) of my best liberty friends.

If you were involved in the campaign—or if you weren’t, and wonder about those “crazy Paul people”—get the movie.  And then, get to work.  There’s a lot to be done yet!

LLE

House Financial Services Cmte. Hearing on Regulatory Overhaul

Now up on C-Span.

"This is an historic hearing... The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Paul, filed this bill for the first time in 1983. There then ensued a number of things, including 12 years where the republican party controlled the agenda of this committee and found no time for this hearing. So I am very pleased in this show of bipartisanship to give this important piece of legislation its first hearing ever."

"... In 2003 ... Mr. Paul was in line through seniority to be the next chairman of the domestic monetary policy subcommittee. That subcommittee immediately disappeared. It was merged into the international monetary policy subcommittee because there were people who were trying to shield the Federal Reserve from Paul's influence." - Barney Frank

Why did the republican party, so enamored of liberty and smaller government, fail at striking at the root? It pretty much says everything you need to know about them. Hopefully, at least some of the two-faced republican types within the GOP will depart in the next midterm election.