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.