The Film Archives: The Washington Journal With Brian Lamb- Camille Paglia & Bay Buchanan: On College Students, Education, Government, Women in Politics

Source:The Film Archives- Author Camille Paglia, giving a speech at some event, perhaps in New York City.

Source:The New Democrat

"Buchanan was the national treasurer of the "Reagan for President" primary campaigns of 1976 and 1980, and the Reagan-Bush general election campaigns of 1980 and 1984. After appearing regularly on CNN's news program Inside Politics, she became a commentator for The Situation Room, and later Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull. She previously served as the co-anchor of Equal Time on CNBC and MSNBC, and during that time also hosted a two-hour radio talk show."

From The Film Archives

I like and respect Camille Paglia a lot, at least when I'm quick enough to understand what she's saying, or at the very least catch every word that she says. She talks the way kitty cats run and Nascar cars race. You can write a book with her mouth in a few minutes. But when I am able to follow along she makes a lot of sense. Her politics at least up to ten years ago would put on the liberal-libertarian or classical liberal wing of the American political spectrum. ( The real Liberals )

She calls herself a feminist but I would put her on the classical side of that as well. That women shouldn't be discriminated against based on gender, but that women shouldn't be rewarded based on their gender. Unlike a lot of these so-called radical feminists today on the New-Left ( or Far-Left ) who think America should just be made up of women and gay men and that masculinity ( unless it comes from women ) is somehow a bad thing. That straight men at least Caucasian straight men, are inherently bad people and that straight men are ruining America.

Camille's politics when it comes to liberalism and feminism, seems to be about choice. That women should be able to make their own choices in life and be able to think for themselves. That if they want to work, then that should be their choice. But if they decide to stay home and raise their kids which is also a job and a paying job at that, then that is what should be able to do. That women should be able to think for themselves and not be feel the need to look down at straight men and see them as evil. But if they want to believe that straight men are bad, then that would be their choice as a radical feminist.

That women shouldn't be forced to be big government Socialists, who believe big centralized government has all the answers in life. Or they can be Conservative-Libertarians who don't believe big government has many if any answers at all to solving problems in society. But that they should be able to think for themselves without radical feminists viewing them as sellouts to the feminist cause or a traitors who are in the laps and beds of straight men.

If there was a free market for women, it would've been created by the Camille Paglia liberal wing of feminism. That there should be choice across the board and not just when it comes to abortion and sexuality but in life in general. When and if they work, sexuality in general, how they should think, what their politics should be. Instead of being told by radical feminists and the Socialist-Left or the Christian-Right on what it means to be a real woman in America and how all women should be forced to live.

The Millennial Federalist: 'Federalist Coalition- An Awakening of Federalism'

Source: GOP USA- The form of government that the United States of America is built around.

Source:The New Democrat

"In which John Green teaches you about the United States Constitution. During and after the American Revolutionary War, the government of the new country operated under the Articles of Confederation. While these Articles got the young nation through its war with England, they weren't of much use when it came to running a country. So, the founding fathers decided try their hand at nation-building, and they created the Constitution of the United States, which you may remember as the one that says We The People at the top. John will tell you how the convention came together, some of the compromises that had to be made to pass this thing, and why it's very lucky that the framers installed a somewhat reasonable process for making changes to the thing. You'll learn about Shays' Rebellion, the Federalist Papers, the elite vs rabble dynamic of the houses of congress, and start to find out just what an anti-federalist is."

From Crash Course

Source:Crash Course- Talking about federalism and the American Federal Republic.

If you want to know why the United States is a Federal Republic and you’re now an adult, well you missed that opportunity in high school during your social studies class. Perhaps you were too busy texting your classmate who sat right next to you to bother to take and learn social studies. If you’re currently in high school or about to enter high school, I’ll explain why we have a Federal Republic  and very limited government. At least compared with the social democracies, theocratic and military dictatorships around the world.

If you think Uncle Sam is too greedy and paternalistic and takes too much of your money and personal decision-making away from you, join the club. You might have to join a waiting list and have a better chance of winning multiple state lotteries on the same day than being able to join this club anytime soon, because it has somewhere around 200 hundred-million members, not including the Socialists who complain everyday about not being taxed enough and going crazy about all the personal and economic decisions that they have to make every day, As well as the Christian-Theocrats and Christian-Nationalists in America who complain that America is too decentralized and because of that states and localities get to make decisions everyday that violates their religious and moral values.

But if you think Uncle Sam is too greedy and too fat, I’ll introduce to King George from the United Kingdom of Britain. Who was so fat because of all the money he took from the American Colonies that he would make Paris Hilton look like a foodaholic today. To be completely serious for a moment and perhaps even multiple moments: the reason why America is a Federal Republic, is because the men who would become our Founding Fathers Englishmen who escaped mainland Britain to come to what would become America later on, were tired of London telling them what to do and taking most of their money from them. Two-hundred and forty-one years later Britain is till a unitarian government where most of the governmental power in a country of almost sixty-five million people resides in London.

Our Founding Fathers (our Founding Liberals, actually) wanted to break away from that unitarianism form of government. And create a country where the power would be decentralized. Where yes, there would be a Federal Government primarily responsible for national security, foreign policy, interstate law enforcement, interstate commerce, interstate transportation. But where the states could take care of the issues and make policies that affect their people in their states. Where localities could do the same thing. Where you wouldn’t have Washington with some Federal Superintendent of Education, telling Milwaukee, Boston, and other cities how to educate their kids. How to police their streets, how to regulate their local business’s , and other examples.

In a huge vast country of three-hundred and twenty-million people (get your brain wrapped around that number for a moment) a Federal Republic and federalism are the only way you could be able to keep a country this huge and diverse, with all of our racial, ethnic, cultural, and political diversity, together. Otherwise California, Florida, Texas, New York, perhaps all the states in New England together, would break away from Washington and form their own independent countries. Because Uncle Sam can’t mind his own damn business and is too greedy and paternalistic telling states and localities in many cases thousands of miles away, six-thousand or so in the case of Hawaii. We have a Federal Republic and are not a unitarian social democracy, or a religious theocracy, in order to keep the country together. And come together when it's in our national interest.

David Brin: 'Greed, Oligarchy & Marx'

Source: David Brin- The case for greed.

Source:The Daily View

"Earlier we looked at electoral post-mortems by some on the Right. And last time, we scrutinized the whole range of Electoral College possibilities, in case there turn out to be forty+ republican electors who are simultaneously patriotic, moral and sane... which these fellows deem to be highly unlikely.

Only now let’s do a sudden veer! Taking you into an unexpected direction by citing a name you thought relegated to the dustbin of history. It seems likely that, during the centennial year of his greatest victory, we'll be hearing more of him."

Read more from David Brin

"In his book "Capitalism and Freedom" (1962) Milton Friedman (1912-2006) advocated minimizing the role of government in a free market as a means of creating political and social freedom.

An excerpt from an interview with Phil Donahue in 1979."

From Safvio

Source:Salvio- Economics Professor Milton Friedman, making the case for greed, on The Phil Donahue Show in 1979.

I’m going to quote Milton Friedman here in his 1979 interview on the Phil Donahue Show that you can see here as well. But Phil asked Professor Friedman essentially, what is greed and tried to explain why he believed greed was a bad thing. With Milton replying by saying: “What is greed? Do you think China, Japan, Russia and Europe don’t run on greed? Do you believe we as Americans aren’t greedy?” And he jokingly said which got a laugh from the audience: “it’s only the other guy whose greedy.” I would’ve added while everyone else is selfless.

But Milton’s point there was perfect. Greed according to Webster’s: “is a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed.” Which could cover a whole lot of territory. I mean all we really only need to be able to move around, have enough food, a place to stay, security and health care, in order to survive and keep living.

I’m not making the case for excess and for people to make money off  of others in an unfair manner by essentially stealing what others worked for to collect for themselves. I’m saying that greed in of itself is not a bad thing and when managed properly is a very effective and necessary tool to have a strong economy where economic freedom is available for others. Because you have a society where everyone is incentivized to get educated, work hard, be very productive and then yes collect the fruits of their labor. Because government isn’t taxing people to excess and being greedy with other people’s money. Even if they want to help the less-fortunate. But instead everyone has the opportunity to live well and be successful. To be able to take care of themselves economically and create those opportunities for their kids as well.

What we shouldn’t be doing from the Far-Left is to say that rich people have a lot of money and the poor and the lower middle class (Donald Trump voters) are struggling just to keep their jobs and pay their bills. So the answer here to take heavily from the rich and have government take care of everyone else. Which is what Phil Donahue advocated for in the 1970s and 1980s and what Senator Bernie Sanders and other Democratic Socialists, advocate today. Because then you would create an economy where no one is wealthy and no one can be greedy, because everyone is poor. Unless they have a sweet job with the central government. Because now you are punishing success and wealth and subsidizing poverty. With people thinking they can just live off of government. But no one left to pay those bills.

Again, greed by itself is not a bad thing. Like anything else when there’s too much of freed when it goes uncheck, when power becomes unbalanced and absolute with one group of people with no checks and balances, is when greed becomes a problem. When you allow people to not only get real wealthy, which by itself is not a problem, but then when you let them essentially write off all of their tax burden and stick the middle class with the taxes for the rich, is when greed becomes bad. As much as Gordon Gecko believes greed is good. (Great Wall Street 1987 line) Greed is good, but so is water, but with too much water you can drown and with too much greed you could drown the economy leaving very little opportunity for anyone who isn’t real rich which will be most of the population.

I’m not a Socialist, especially not a Marxist and I’m not an Randian (named for Ayn Rand) When it comes to economics. But a Liberal in the Jack Kennedy sense (the real sense of liberal) who believes in individual freedom economic and personal, but for everyone. That yes you want wealthy people and you want an upper class. But not just for the privileged few, but for a lot of the country. With a strong middle class that isn’t lower, but able to not just pay their bills, but to  live in a nice home, put their kids through college, put money away, health insurance for their whole family, retirement security, even be able to take a nice vacation with the money to finance that.

And instead of a country with lot of poor people and people one pay check and a lost job away from poverty, with very few rich people, you instead reverse that. With a country that has a strong middle class with people able to move up even from that, yes wealthy people but more wealthy people. And instead very few poor people with them having the ability to move up as well. With things like education, job training, infrastructure and economic development. You don’t get there by punishing wealth and subsidizing poverty. But instead encouraging wealth and subsidizing people and empowering people who need it to climb the economic ladder. So they too can be part of a strong middle class and ever do better than and become very rich themselves