Political and Correct

"Tea Party Pick Causes Uproar on Civil Rights" -NYTimes headline

Rand Paul should stick to the winning campaign strategy of Bob McDonnell, Chris Christie, and Scott Brown: keep the attention on fiscal restraint, and stay away from hot-button social issues. Bush 41 speechwriter Mary Kate Cary, USN&WR

These attacks prove one thing for certain: the liberal establishment is desperate to keep leaders like me out of office, and we are sure to hear more wild, dishonest smears during this campaign. -Rand Paul

It is the scourge of "small l" libertarians running for office that there will be detractors from from both the left and right. Sooner or later, one side or the other finds something to demonize and distort.

I do enjoy politicians who reach into history and point out where we went wrong. Many honest politicians do this. The dishonest ones are all served by the status quo, so there won't be many history lessons from their corner. Which is to say that there won't be a lot of senators defending Rand Paul. It's all right. These senators are an endangered species themselves.

The statement Rand Paul made was boilerplate libertarian thinking that the government has no right to put their boots on the throats of private businesses . Whether it's a drug store diner or British British Petroleum, the idea is 100% correct.

When a democrat says something like this, he is allowed to pass over the "Bridge of Death". A republican is cast into the gorge. But a libertarian is besieged from both sides, and the true kernel of the idea is buried in the false outrage.

Rand Paul's candidacy is different. It may be the change everybody voted for in 2008 (and is still waiting for). I'm not sure; but so far I agree with everything Rand Paul is charged with saying. Most voters don't understand nuanced policy, but this is evidence that Rand Paul does, and that's exactly the type of politician we need in the US Senate now.

Paul's observations were consistent with the idea that government intervention is limited by the constitution, as it should be. It makes him different from almost all the other Senators, and it's a difference we could certainly benefit from.

I am reasonably sure the voters of Kentucky are smart enough to understand that. As for the media, The New York Times, and US News and World Report should not try to cover nuanced politics. They wind up looking as shallow and biased as they want people to think of Dr. Paul.

School's Out

Barry Obama has been doing the college circuit lately. I've been to one of his commencement addresses. Most recently, he shows up at Hampton University. There, he espoused the notion that all people should be given (or words to that effect) a college education. This sounds like a sweet sentiment until you realize that if everybody has a degree, a degree will be nothing special. This outcome is very consistent with the other tenets of socialism, forced "equal outcome", the punishment of real success, etc.. The bonus for Barry is that if this happens, the costs of education will go up, as the demand rises. His teacher's union constituency will get larger and happier.

Meanwhile, there's no proof that college educations are all that helpful in finding one's productive way through life. Some college educations are a complete waste of time. It would be prudent to take a closer look at the value of a college education before conscripting a large number of kids to the paper chase. The US actually needs high productivity, and that may be better achieved by putting people to work as soon as possible.

Putting people to work as soon as possible is hard to do when they must make $7.50/ hour. Most kids aren't worth $7.50/hour. Four years worth of college may not even help. Lower the minimum wage to $4.00 for high school students, so they'll have a chance to learn how to be productive. By the time they are 21, they will have several marketable skills, and can actually deliver $15 worth of work every hour, raising their standard of living, and able to start a family.

Schools should be preserved for those who wish to learn. Why should everyone be forced or even encouraged to go to school indefinitely? It makes professional students out of average people, postponing their entry into the real world, and taking up valuable instructor time.