The Wall Street Journal released a number of documents from Newt’s professor days today.  One of these documents features a letter from Gingrich containing the following money quote:

“I am more a critical progressive seeking reform rather than a new leftist advocating radical change.”

That’s a pretty apt description of the typical RINO, it would seem.

Members of the media asked Rick Perry in a previous debate who his economic advisors were, and he declined to provide specific names. Herman Cain offered a specific name in the Bloomberg debate, and now we see what happens when this kind of information becomes public. Reporters rushed off to consult Rich Lowrie’s LinkedIn profile. It turns out that Lowrie is a financial advisor with Wells Fargo in a small town in Ohio, and that he holds a B.S. in accountancy from Case Western Reserve University. Suggestions that Lowrie is “unqualified” now circulate through the blogosphere, but what implications does this hold for our political process?

In the New York Times, reporters Trip Gabriel and Susan Saulny noted that Lowrie “has never worked for a policy research group or an academic institution, or made a name through economic analysis.” In other words, the media often suggests that voters desire candidates who they can “drink a beer with,” but don’t let anyone without a degree from Harvard or Yale offer any kind of advice to those same candidates.

What kind of chilling effect does this pseudo-investigative behavior have on “regular citizens” who want to help candidates? How many citizens will be reluctant to assist campaigns in the future for fear that they will face public ridicule for “not being qualified enough?” In former Eastern bloc regimes it was the midnight knock of the secret police that kept a lid on popular political expression. In modern America, it’s the midnight phone calls from reporters and snide jeers made during the 24/7 news cycle.

Who defines what degrees or past employment experience are legitimate for advising candidates or holders of public office?  Is this kind of credentialism compatible with our ideals of self-government?  How easily we forget that the distinctions between the various university departments in the liberal arts and social sciences evolved in arbitrary ways in Europe and America.  There’s a lot of overlap and cross-pollination between the fields of economics, political science, psychology, and so on.  The same is true for the “business” disciplines, including accounting.  Yet too many Americans appear to desire to be governed by technocrats.

We are all Rich Lowrie.  The liberal elite have declared war on the “53 percent” of us.  I’m a volunteer for the Michele Bachmann campaign, and I’m “just” a technical writer with a master’s degree in political science from Purdue University.   I’m sure in someone’s eyes I’m “not qualified” to participate in the political process. Any of us could end up in Lowrie’s position.

People are free to disagree with the merits of Cain’s “999″ tax plan, but attacking the educational or occupational background of one of the creators of the plan is merely a species of an ad hominem attack.

Imagine if we had more “regular people” involved in public life, and more citizen-legislators instead of lawyers occupying legislative seats in DC?  This is one reason why we need stronger term limits, so that we can create enough churn and make it easier for “fresh blood” to serve in office.

Keep in mind that the constitutional requirement to become president is to be at least 35 years of age, a natural-born citizen, and have resided fourteen years in the United States. Lowrie meets these criteria as well.  Having a degree from Harvard or being the CEO of a major Wall Street bank isn’t in the list of criteria.  After all, Barack Obama himself was a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, and how’s that been working for us?

Many thanks to Furman University’s Conservative Students for a Better Tomorrow for inviting Dr. Jerome Corsi to speak this evening on his book America for Sale.  The CSBT is composed of a group of brave and dedicated students given that they find themselves immersed in an environment where, as CEO Stephen Sebastian pointed out during the introduction, a university poll revealed 87% of the faculty voted for Barack Obama.

Corsi described his 2008 book, a New York Times bestseller, as “unfortunately prophetic.”  He characterized America’s present economic woes as “not an accident,” but a situation that globalists have intended.  Corsi stated, “this is not a recession or depression–this is what globalism looks like.  Far from being a conspiracy theorist, Corsi explained, he’s just reporting on what they themselves have written.  He provided some specific names of the perpetrators, such as George Soros, Zbigniew Brzezinski, David Rockefeller, and Henry Kissinger.  ”They’re on the Left and the Right,” Corsi added.

Globalists tend to see borders as “artificial” and a “nuisance,” and Corsi indicated that they openly have written “against the nation-state, the family, and the idea that the United States should manage its economy for the benefit of the people of the United States.”

The danger Corsi identifies is that multinational corporations ship jobs to India and China in search of cheap labor, resulting in “the loss of the American middle class.”  In light of the “special drawing rights” pushed by the IMF, Corsi suggested that “the drop of the dollar is only beginning.”  He pointed out that “gold, even at these prices, is still a bargain.”

One solution Corsi proposes is “decession,” a term he coined describing a process by which the states (and the people) reassert their ninth and tenth amendment rights and “tell the Feds we don’t want your health care or involvement in public schools,” and so on.  If that doesn’t work, Corsi suggested that “the next step is secession–the United States is closer to breaking up than at any time in [his] life.”

Corsi also pointed out that over 200 communities in the United States print their own money, such as the “Berkshire Bucks” program in which local merchants agree to participate.  He encourages Americans to focus on community, family, and church (fundamentals we’ve forgotten).  ”Some communities are going to be better than others,” Corsi predicted, “South Carolina is closer to the top of the list and New York and New Jersey are closer to the bottom.”  ”The best way to care for the poor,” he continued, “is to help them build families and get to work.”

At one point during the discussion the example of the Soviet Union was offered to show how globalism and socialism are unsustainable.  Corsi pinpoints the reason behind the failure of globalism resides in a human nature that is inherently inclined toward the local, stating that “the Tower of Babel didn’t work.”

Turning toward the coming elections, Corsi expects that the winning GOP candidate will be “ABO: anybody but Obama.” He hailed the Tea Party movement as “one of the most important developments in his lifetime,” adding that “we’re not going to take it any more’ is the same spirit that drove our Founding Fathers” to throw off British rule.

I’m pleased that this event was brought to the Upstate here in the reddest of states, South Carolina.  It’s definitely worth fighting the good fight and presenting what Ronald Reagan once called “a banner of bold colors, not pale pastels.”

I’m looking forward to attending CPAC FL next week.  It’ll be my first CPAC.  The preliminary schedule is now posted (PDF file) and I’m zeroing in on a few points of attraction.  Michele Bachmann is the first of the primary candidates to speak at 9:15 a.m., and I’ll definitely be paying attention since she is my first choice candidate this election.

I’m also looking forward to “Social Media 101″ being hosted that morning as part of the New Media Training by Americans for Prosperity.  I’ll also drop in on The Leadership Institute’s Grassroots Activist Training in the afternoon.  Speeches from politicians are inspiring and edifying, but these training sessions will help attendees get some positive action accomplished for conservatism out there on the ground.

I’m very excited about the planned panel discussion “Recruiting the Next Generation of Conservative Activists: Are Youth Awakening from an Obama Hangover.”  As an early thirty-something, this is definitely where the action is.  A younger colleague of mine pointed out to me recently that it’s our “Beavis and Butthead” generation that’s now old enough under the provisions of the Constitution to hold federal office–and that scares him.  That conversation drove home the point for me that it’s the youth that we need to win and motivate.  I definitely plan to do my part in this realm.

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that Graham trotted out the line “we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here” in reference to Perry’s remarks on Afghanistan. Graham is soft on the immigration issue, which totally determines whether we’ll end up “fighting them over here.” The War on Terror isn’t a military problem, at heart it’s an immigration problem.