Gene Paslov – Carson City’s most prominent unreconstituted California liberal who, as Nevada’s government-schools superintendent for nine years, directed public education’s headlong slide down the razor blade of mediocrity – is now offering his expert advice to the GOP. Oh, joy.

“The Republican Party has been hijacked by right wing ideologues,” the former school bureaucrat wrote in a letter published in the Appeal on Wednesday. “I hate to resort to name calling, but it’s difficult to identify these anti-government, anti-public school, anti-tax radicals as anything other than ideologues.”

Here’s another name for such persons: “Founding Fathers.”

Indeed, if Mr. Paslov can somehow find an American history book in one of his old government schools and blow the dust off its covers, he would discover that this nation’s very creation came about thanks to what he considers radical right-wing hostility to government and taxation.

For example, radical right-wing ideologue Thomas Jefferson said, “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive.” Radical right-wing ideologue Thomas Paine added, “Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”

And get a load of this anti-government sentiment by radical right-wing ideologue George Washington: “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence–it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and fearful master.”

As for hostility toward taxes, Mr. Paslov might want to read up on a certain tea party hosted in Boston Harbor by radical right-wing ideologues John Hancock and Sam Adams (who went on to have a rather right-tasting beer named after him). Or consider the words of radical right-wing ideologue Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall who declared in 1819 that “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.”

The stated purpose of government, in the “spread the wealth” socialist mind of Gene Paslov, is to provide “needed government services to the greatest number of citizens.”

But radical right-wing ideologue Thomas Jefferson disagreed. “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated,” declared the author of our Declaration of Independence. Radical right-wing ideologue James Madison chimed in that “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”

Further showing an alarming, but not totally surprising, misunderstanding of our governmental system and history, Mr. Paslov also wrote, “Muth would do well to remember that in our democracy the government is, ‘We the people.’”

How embarrassing. The enormity of the error of that statement is breath-taking, especially when one considers this man was in charge of the government schools in Nevada for almost a decade.

We do not live in a “democracy” here in the United States. We live under a governing system explained by radical right-wing ideologue Benjamin Franklin at the end of the Constitutional Convention of 1787. In response to a woman’s question about what type of government the convention delegates had agreed upon, Franklin responded, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”

“We the people” do not vote on every issue or every lame-brained, touchy-feely proposal that comes down the pike. That would be a “democracy.” Instead, we elect representatives who cast votes on our behalf - preferably within the confines of our Constitution. But when elected representatives exceed their authority, the courts may strike down their lame-brained legislation as unconstitutional. It’s part of what is called our system of “checks and balances.” You could look it up.

One would hope a former head of the Nevada public schools would know and understand the difference between a “republic” and a “democracy.” The fact that Mr. Paslov apparently doesn’t goes a long way toward explaining why the kids who go to his public schools don’t either.

Fortunately, I’m here to take up the slack. And that concludes our history/civics lesson for the day, kids. Class dismissed.

By Chuck Muth
Special to the Nevada Appeal
November 28, 2008

Reading Fridays post “Unity – Today’s most needed trait” by Blue Collar Muse I was delighted by the positive and progressive tone (the good progressive). This is exactly where we need to be right now as a movement. We need to be recovering and regrouping, not pointing fingers.

Although BCM included a paragraph on Christians valuing the works of Hayek, Rand and von Mises, it was pretty clear to me that “Unity” was written by a primarily fiscal conservative speaking to other fiscal conservatives. BCM exposed the value in not “politically excommunicating” the religious right from the movement as it would be detrimental to our cause. I agree whole heartedly and in the same spirit of unity I’d like to beg the same question of social conservatives: Consider the Libertarians. What is to be gained and what lost if we politically excommunicate them?

The argument for dismissing the libertarian wing, just like the argument for dismissing the religious right, lies primarily in campaign expedience. This was clearly evident in this year’s election cycle. It is close to impossible to sell a hard-line free market point of view in a retail political world when the free market is collapsing. The populist message is so much more comforting to the average American. Imagine the uproar if Senator McCain had stood up and said, “This is the market correcting itself. This correction will be unbelievably painful. Hundreds of thousands of you will lose your jobs, your homes will devalue, and you will earn less money. And as president I assure you that I will do nothing to stop it, but work to make sure the federal government prevents a repeat by not meddling in the market again.” This seems politically suicidal; however, I believe that acting by what is politically expedient has put us where we are. The benefits of free market principals far outweigh the diligence required to defend the sentiment of this statement.

To understand these benefits from a Christian perspective we must understand the liberty that a valuable life demands. We work tirelessly to defend the unborn life because of the belief that life created in God’s image has supreme value. This value does not lose relevance after birth. This value is what makes the “truths” that the Founders spoke of “self evident.” If individual life has value how dare we use the police power of the state to make it the slave of any other earthly cause? This sentiment is the base of the philosophical argument for libertarianism. In his article “THE ARGUMENT FOR FREE MARKETS: MORALITY VS. EFFICIENCY,” Walter E. Williams of the Cato institute writes:

All too often defenders of free-market capitalism base their defense on the demonstration that capitalism is more efficient in terms of resource allocation and, hence, leads to a larger bundle of goods than socialism and other forms of statism. However, as Milton Friedman frequently points out, economic efficiency and greater wealth should be promoted as simply a side-benefit of free markets. The intellectual defense of free-market capitalism should focus on its moral superiority. In other words, even if free enterprise were not more efficient than other forms of human organization, it is morally superior because it is rooted in voluntary relationships rather than force and coercion, and it respects the sanctity of the individual.

Look at this again and replace “the individual” with the synonym “life.” “…and it respects the sanctity of life.” Looks a lot like the platform of the Christian right, doesn’t it? Americans who value life should be terrified of notions such as using tax policy to achieve “fairness.” By understanding the liberty that valuable life demands we learn the value of an entire movement built around defending this liberty.

It is my belief that this isn’t an impossible sell. That if we understand that a belief in free-market principles doesn’t necessarily stem from greed or selfishness we can convince the majority of Americans to vote on the clearly morally superior message. The common good is a collection of individual lives not some government generated statistic. It is attained by default if we work towards the good of all individuals, not by weighing the relative success and failure of individuals in some sort of social equal-arm balance where a net balance is considered “fair.”

-Scott Thornberry

In-fighting is part of politics. There are fierce battles for position and conflict over who gets the credit and who the blame.

Usually it’s kept from public view. But not always. The very public spat between Ron Paul supporters and the rest of the Right is a good example of a “not always” moment. So is Mike Huckabee’s lambasting of Libertarians. And Christians are being scape-goated for the GOP’s declining brand popularity due to strongly held views on social issues and Creationism.

Unchecked, the Right may succeed in disemboweling itself. Staunching the bleeding is hard as restricting faith to the heart prevents mental use of biblical warnings about divided houses. Worse, successful “kills” deplete the Right’s strength. We agree on more than we disagree. There are some very real differences and these will need to be worked out. But using exclusion as a tool in this working out is precisely the wrong approach.

Coexisting is not the same as embracing. Social Conservatives can work with Libertarians without embracing the legalization of all drugs and eradication of all borders. Libertarians can reciprocate without “walking an aisle” or surrendering any presumed intellectual superiority. This strengthens us all at little cost. Intentionally devouring one another, on the other hand, not only thins the ranks physically, it depletes stores of philosophical and principle based strength as well.

Consider the Christians. What is to be gained and what lost if we politically excommunicate them?

No more sheep bleating about abortion and the sanctity of marriage. No more accusations of ignorance over Creationism or Intelligent Design. If that is all that’s lost, perhaps it’s a good thing to give believers the “Left Foot of Fellowship” as they exit the building. But what else do we lose?

We lose the stature and strength Christianity has to speak truth to power. From Nathan to King David and John the Baptist to Herod to William Wilberforce to Slavers and today’s Pro-Lifers, Christianity has been the platform from which many a naked emperor’s exposure has been exposed.

We lose the foundation from which to fight the relativism of the Left. The culture we enjoy did not simply arise from nothing. Christianity provides instruction to those who value it. Imperfectly built structure? Absolutely. But a valuable structure, nonetheless. 16th Century Europe birthed two influences on developing Western Civilization. The Renaissance, steeped in “Man is the measure of all things”, gave us Humanism and the French Revolution with its horrors. The Reformation, steeped in “God is the measure of all things”, gave us the means to judge the behavior of all men, even Kings, and the American Revolution with its Freedoms and Rights.

Evangelicals who would force Libertarians from the ranks produce a similar drain. The works of Hayek, Rand and von Mises may not be theological masterpieces in the Christian sense. But their impact on Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness cannot be overestimated. We need people who champion their beliefs as we need those who champion Christian faith.

Those with their minds made up will accept no argument to the contrary. To them I offer a hearty Godspeed and Fair Winds. You are going where I cannot and dare not follow. But for those who agree, and more importantly to those who are unsure, I offer a welcome to the Don’t Go Movement. Based on the premise that which unites us is more important than that which divides us, DGM is a community dedicated to working together despite differences. The New Testament word for “unity” is “symphonia”. The unity of the disparate instruments in a modern symphony is not all sounding the same. Rather it is all sounding together, at the proper time and with their individual contributions.

At DGM you’ll find a broad range of philosophies and principles. While all are Right of Center, not all who are Right of Center hold them. It makes for spirited debate. It makes for a learning experience. And serving in unity makes us a near unstoppable force when we turn, as one, to focus on that which we both hold dear.

Join us won’t you? Woodwind or brass, percussion or string, we’ve got a chair with your name on it. Come lend your passion to the pieces we play. You won’t be sorry!

Written by: Blue Collar Muse

I remember back in 2004, while working with the Bush campaign out in Nevada, getting in to constant arguments with the Nevada GOP about web activism, new media, and the need to integrate it with the party.

In fact, I had stayed up two nights in a row to design and develop a website that would rally conservatives in Washoe County to get out the votes for Bush. My website was located at washoerepublicans.com, the official website was located at washoerepublicans.org.

I had created the website, with full intentions of giving it to the GOP so they could use it to help get Bush elected. I was young, excited, and thrilled to have designed a state of the art website unlike anything the Nevada GOP had ever seen. Granted, the site was terrible when compared to today’s standards, but back then it was a pretty good attempt at building a tool that could foster online community.

In fact, this is what the Washoe Republicans had at the time… this is what I was providing.

One would think that the GOP would have been excited about this new site, especially considering the fact that a 24 year old kid walked in off the street and built it for free, right?

Wrong.

Instead, Jane Maxfield, a terrible excuse for leadership, called the Bush campaign guy and demanded that I immediately remove the website. You see, Maxfield couldn’t fathom the idea that someone had built and understood a platform that utilized the power of the web without the GOP having a say or understanding of it themselves. So instead of embracing my actions and integrating it into their plans, they kicked me to the curb and insulted my work for them.

That was my first time volunteering for the Nevada GOP, and from that day on I felt like I was at constant war with them when it came to engaging new, young individuals to be politically active while using the internet to organize.

But that was 2004… surely things have changed, right?

Well, yes and no. Yes, because the GOP at least acknowledges a need for online infrastructure/organization/activism. No, because the GOP still believes this is a realm they need to control.

Note to GOP… you cannot control new media. The second you think you can is the same second you FAIL.

Today I found, via Leslie Carbone, another prime example of the GOP establishment’s complete failure to understand new media. For the record, I believe that it can be seen as innocent to misunderstand something such as new media, but I also believe that if you refuse to admit you lack the understanding, and instead assert yourself king of the realm, you FAIL.

As you can see, the Virginia GOP establishment, along with several key GOP insiders, have committed the ultimate new media sin. They did this by attempting to inject themselves into the Virginia blogosphere as a dominate resource that, according to them, will be the “ONLY major Republican blog in all of Virginia”.

This ultimate FAIL action was committed by the Hampton Roads GOP. While they’ve since changed the language on their website and removed the assertion of being the “ONLY” major Republican blog in all of Virginia, they still have what I would consider offensive comments.

Such as “Yes there are numerous blogs on the web currently; however, we are a venue for Republicans.”

What is that supposed to mean? Is BearingDrift not a venue for Republicans? Is it just one of those “numerous blogs on the web”?

BearingDrift, in fact, called Hampton Roads GOP out on this.

There are two ways the Hampton Roads GOP could have responded to this.

A) The right way
HRGOP should have written a post of apology, admitting it was badly worded and admitting that they should have worked with the Virginia blogosphere as a network of people looking to promote free-market conservatism.

b) The wrong way
HRGOP should enter the comment war happening on the post, dig their heels in, and defend their pitiful attempt to assert themselves king of new media in Virginia.

The HRGOP chose to go with option B. Read through the comments on the post at Bearing Drift and you’ll see what I mean.

The GOP has a hard lesson to learn here. In summary, that lesson is that you can never, under any circumstance, control new media. You can’t control the message, you can’t control the technology, and you can’t control the people. You can’t “use” new media, and you can’t make it push your agenda.

And you can never, NEVER insult the blogosphere and then expect it to embrace you.

The real trick is to roll your sleeves up and immerse yourself. Don’t claim to be a “professional”. Instead, claim to be someone wanting to learn and build relationships. Work to develop networks and build friendships. Work to help people trust you.

Then, and ONLY then can you launch a website and integrate it safely in to the center-right blogosphere. As an individual you can do whatever you like, but as an organization with a partisan agenda, you have everything to lose.

And in this case, HRGOP… you lost.

As a final parting note, I would like to offer this last list of ideas. When pitching yourselves as “A project of the Republican Professionals Network”, you should probably be professional enough to consult with actual bloggers to ensure you know the following.

1) A site built by Yahoo Hosting is not ground breaking in new media. In fact, it’s rather archaic.
2) A site with no RSS feeds that claims to be a “blog”… really?
3) A “Helpful Links” page that doesn’t link to a single Virginia blog is not really helping your pledge of being a new media source
4) If you’re going to ask me to volunteer, perhaps you should tell me what I’m volunteering for, and what I can do to help.
5) You should really have a phone number somewhere on your website
6) Admit you were wrong, get over it, and move on

Nuff said…

-Eric Odom

Establishment Republicans are using the GOP’s election losses as an excuse to declare conservatism dead. But it wasn’t conservatism that was rejected by the people; it was Republicans who rejected conservatism who were rejected.

Last week, Nevada state Sen. Warren Hardy (R-Las Vegas) declared that Republicans have to run moderate candidates who can attract Democrat voters if they ever want to win again. You know, like moderate John McCain (lost), moderate Rep. Jon Porter (lost) and moderate state Sen. Joe Heck (lost). Great strategy, Senator.

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Bill Raggio (R-Reno) declared that the Republican Party has “gone too far to the right.” The moderate Republican added that the “far right message does not sell.”

Really?

Conservative Nevada Rep. Dean Heller – who, unlike moderate Jon Porter, voted against the $700 billion Wall Street bailout – won handily. And at least six ballot measures to raise taxes were crushed by Nevada voters last week. So it’s not that the conservative message won’t sell, it’s that too many Republicans aren’t selling it. Instead, they’re selling us Democrat Lite.

Many of you will remember Lyn Nofziger. He was a close adviser to Ronald Reagan dating back to his days as governor of California. And without question, Lyn would be considered “too far right” by establishment Republicans today. Here’s how Lyn defined what it meant to be a conservative…

“Allowing for differences I would define a conservative, first as one who believes in the Constitution as it is written. That takes care of free speech, freedom of religion, the right to petition the government, the right to keep and bear arms and, in the words of William O. Douglas in one of his saner moments, ‘the right to be let alone.’

“Second, a conservative believes in small, limited government at every level. Along with this he believes strongly in individual responsibility. That is, a person or a family should take care of itself and turn for help to government only when all other means have been exhausted. It also means that society, before government, has a duty to take care of its own. Government should be a resource of last resort.

“Third, a conservative believes taxes should be levied for the purpose of financing the limited responsibilities of government such as providing for the common defense, catching and incarcerating criminals, minting money and filling potholes. Taxes should not be levied for the purpose of redistributing wealth.

“That’s about it. I know there are those who say a conservative should be pro-life, which I am, but I’m not sure a person has to be that to qualify as a conservative. Nor am I sure that a person must be opposed to pornography, which I am. In both cases there are questions of individual rights and responsibilities which are arguable.

“One other thing I think a conservative believes is that the parents, not government, are and should be responsible for the upbringing and behavior of their children.”

Now you tell me voters won’t “buy” that message. If Republicans would only run on that common-sense, all-American conservative platform - and then govern like they meant it once in office - not only would it “sell,” but our state and the country would better off for it.

Or Republicans can take Sen. Hardy’s and Sen. Raggio’s advice and water-down their philosophical beliefs just to get elected. But riddle me this, Batman: Why should voters vote for a Republican who’s only going to grow government a little slower than the Democrats and raise taxes a little less than the Democrats? I mean, if you’re going to hell in a hand-basket, wouldn’t you prefer to get the ride over with as quickly as possible?

Nevada Republicans have come to that proverbial fork in the road. It’s gut-check time. Will they veer off to the Left with Sen. Hardy and Sen. Raggio, or will they bear to the common-sense Right with Lyn Nofziger and Dean Heller? Decisions, decisions.

Written By: Chuck Muth

The well-known definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. House Republicans appear to be insane.

When then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) stepped down in 2006, Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) was elected to replace him. Boehner went on to lead Republicans with a bland, lame, uninspiring legislative agenda. Voters, led by conservatives who sat on their hands, rewarded him by kicking Republicans out of the majority in November of that year, hoping Republicans would wake up and change their evil ways before the White House was on the line.

They didn’t.

Learning nothing from that Election Day massacre, House Republicans re-elected Boehner as Minority Leader. He - and they, collectively, under his leadership - went on to bore the electorate with an unimaginative legislative agenda in opposition to a Democrat-led Congress under Speaker Nancy Pelosi which was even less popular, if you can believe it, than President Bush himself. Under Boehner’s leadership, Republicans couldn’t even agree to back a moratorium on “earmarks” and ended up backing that larded-up $700 billion Wall Street bailout.

Custer-like, Boehner then went on to lead his troops this week to yet another embarrassing election defeat against the most unpopular Congress in modern polling history. As conservative columnist George Will pointed out this week, Boehner has now lost some 55 seats in two short years.

“These are the worst Republican results in consecutive elections since the Depression-era elections of 1930 and 1932,” Will reminds depressed Republican voters. “If, as seems likely at this writing, in January congressional Republicans have 177 representatives.they will be weaker than at any time since after the 1976 elections, when they were outnumbered in the House 292-143.”

There are two things to take from Will’s point: One, Boehner has really stunk up the court; and two, under Boehner things could still get WORSE.

I’m not saying Boehner is a bad guy or that he’s not necessarily a good conservative. I’m saying that when a coach has back-to-back seasons as rotten as Boehner, the team usually fires the coach.

But not Team GOP.

Indeed, word coming out of Washington this week indicates Republicans are about to commit yet another act of political insanity by electing Boehner once again as House Minority Leader.

But don’t blame all conservatives in the House for this insanity. It appears it may be only ONE conservative responsible for this pending disaster - just like it wasn’t all of George Washington’s officers who sold out to the British.

Recognizing that Boehner, clearly enamored with power, was unwilling to do the right thing and step aside graciously, House conservatives, especially those who belong to the Republican Study Committee (RSC), were planning to run one of their own - highly regarded conservative Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) - for Minority Leader. Among those planning the conservative challenge and participating in the strategy sessions was former RSC Chairman Mike Pence (R-Indiana).

And then Pence sold them out.

According to a source close to the situation in Washington, on Thursday - unbeknownst to House conservatives - it was discovered that Pence had cut a deal to support Boehner for yet another term as Minority Leader in exchange for Boehner backing Pence for the #3 leadership position as Republican Conference Chairman. If true, Pence put his own personal ambition ahead of the best interests of the conservative movement and the Republican Party.

If this “deal” was indeed struck and is affirmed in the leadership elections scheduled to take place in a week, House Republicans will not only continue traveling down the now well-worn path of electoral failure, but Pence’s betrayal will divide the GOP ranks even worse than before. So movement grassroots conservatives, if they have any hope of turning their fortunes around in 2010, need to give John Boehner the old “Harriet Miers” treatment.

As you’ll recall, President Bush tried to name his longtime friend and highly under-qualified Harriet Miers to the United States Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O’Connor. The conservative movement was furious and rose up in unified opposition, eventually forcing Miers to withdraw from consideration.

Conservatives need to rise up and oppose Boehner’s re-election as the House GOP Minority Leader in the same manner - or forever hold their peace. Let the calls, emails and faxes begin!

Written by: Chuck Muth

This has been such an encouraging week. Out of the wreckage of the Republican Party, so many voices have risen to speak for the need to return to our core principles. From the ashes, a conservative renaissance is leading the way back to the foundation on which Ronald Reagan built the Party during 1964-89.

But naturally, like any movement rooted in truth and hope, it has its nay-sayers. One theme that these nay-sayers echo is the idea that the world has changed so much over the last 20 years that the themes that worked for Ronald Reagan won’t work any more.

Hogwash.

Yes, the world has changed, in some good ways, and in some bad ways. But not in any way that affects long-term fundamentals.

Economic and political freedom, individual responsibility, and finite government are not matters of personal preference. Nor are they matters, as the wealth-spreaders like to claim, of greed, unfairness, or un-neighborliness.

They are principles that work. They foster prosperity, in the full sense of the term.

If this understanding has diminished, if these principles have lost some luster over the last two decades, that’s in no small measure due to the big-government Republicans who gave them lip service while collaborating with liberals in undermining them. And this craven collaboration is part of why the world faces economic trouble.

Republicans can continue to kow-tow to the whiners who want government to kiss away all their boo-boos, to bail them out of the consequences of their own irresponsibility, to regulate life into comfort and fairness.

And they will continue to lose. The dream of life enveloped by state-sponsored cushions is more than just the cop-out of weak and cowardly souls who think everyone else is responsible for taking care of them. It’s a prescription for impoverishment. When government micro-manages peoples’ lives, when it spreads the wealth around, when it overturns the natural justice that rewards virtue and punishes vice, it makes life worse; it dampens the human spirit, and human flourishing diminishes.

When government adheres to its proper, finite mission, the people prosper. A party that leads the way to prosperity is a party that can win.

Ronald Reagan once said, “I wasn’t a great communicator, but I communicated great things.” Those great things are true, and they don’t change.

Brilliantly written by: Leslie Carbone

Last Friday, I hopped on the computer looking to procrastinate, and ended up getting sucked into a mini-revolution of sorts. At first, I was mildly amused at the antics of a handful of Republican Representatives, thinking they were merely having a little bit of fun before jaunting off on their August vacations. The more I paid attention, the more I noticed: there were no cameras or microphones to catch their impassioned speeches, there weren’t even lights to illuminate the nearly empty House Floor. And yet, they carried on, Twittering out updates on how they were going to stay until Speaker Pelosi came back and a workable solution to our energy problems was reached. My passion for politics was once again ignited; I even fired off a hastily-written (and typo-laden, I’m sure) e-mail to my own Republican Representative asking why she was not there. I’ll admit I was hoping for a show-down between Capital Hill Police and the Reps, a bit let down when they walked away without a fight. I thought it was over, and the little sprig of hope growing inside me withered over the weekend.

With word that the fight was not over, that this movement was picking up steam, I knew that something incredible was happening right before our eyes. Yes, a part of me is still bitter that for all these years no progress has been made regarding opening up domestic drilling, but better late than never when it comes to growing backbones in Washington. We’ve hit a tipping point here, whether caused by over $4.00 a gallon gas, the prospect of not affording heating oil this winter, or even just a visceral reaction to the arrogance of Speaker Pelosi and her fellow Democrats. The House of Representatives is the People’s House, and we the people need to change the way we view how business is conducted in Our House. The time has passed for our Reps to ignore the will of the people: those that refuse to heed our calls for a comprehensive energy plan that addresses high oil prices and domestic drilling are on tenuous ground here. I can only hope that real change comes from the actions taken by this gutsy minority during the long days of the summer recess.

That’s right, www.dontgomovement.com is looking for bloggers to help keep the site fresh and loaded with #dontgo content, opinions and news. (more…)