Too much of anything is just as much a misallocation of resources as it is too little, and that applies to higher education just as it applies to everything else. A recent study from The Center for College Affordability and Productivity titled "From Wall Street to Wal-Mart," by Richard Vedder, Christopher Denhart, Matthew Denhart, Christopher Matgouranis and Jonathan Robe, explains that college education for many is a waste of time and money. More than one-third of currently working college graduates are in jobs that do not require a degree. An essay by Vedder that complements the CCAP study reports that there are "one-third of a million waiters and waitresses with college degrees." The study says Vedder — distinguished professor of economics at Ohio University, an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and director of CCAP — "was startled a year ago when the person he hired to cut down a tree had a master's degree in history, the fellow who fixed his furnace was a mathematics graduate, and, more recently, a TSA airport inspector (whose job it was to ensure that we took our shoes off while going through security) was a recent college graduate."
Al Gore is launching a day-long live broadcast called 24 Hours of Reality to promote his global-warming message of manmade climate crisis. It begins Wednesday at 7 p.m. Central Time. His non-profit group, The Climate Reality Project (TCRP), is sponsoring the event. The same hour-long presentation will be repeated 24 times by different hosts in each time zone around the globe. Each presentation will feature local footage from its respective time zone and will be delivered in one of 13 languages. Participants in each video are touted by TCRP as "more than 3,000 activitists of The Climate Project who have been personally trained by Vice President Gore to deliver his slide show around the world." Gore took time from personally training those 3,000-plus activists for an interview with the Washington Post about the upcoming broadcast. In it he claims climate scientists are in agreement that human-caused global warming is to blame "whenever a natural disaster happens."
The "real question,"  former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney said in Monday night's debate among republican presidential candidates, is:  "Does Governor Perry continue to believe that Social Security should not be a federal program, that it's unconstitutional and it should be returned to the states? Or is he going to retreat from that view?" In his cautious comments in the debate and in an op ed piece he wrote for USA Today Texas Governor Rick Perry certainly appeared to be retreating from his previous statements about Social Security, in which he called the program a "Ponzi scheme" and a failure "by any measure." (Maybe Perry remembers the smears directed against Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater in 1964. As John Aloysius Farrell, wrote in the Boston Globe Magazine in 1998: "When Goldwater told an audience in New Hampshire in 1964 that he preferred a voluntary Social Security system, Democrats launched a TV attack ad, showing two hands tearing up a Social Security card. It was a factor in Lyndon Johnson's landslide victory that year.") But if he is, in fact, retreating from the position that such an ambitious program is an unconstitutional expansion of the powers of Congress and the executive branch, he would hardly be the first execute an about face on the subject.
HuffingtonPost.com columnist Andrew Reinbach expressed concern September 12 that the Tea Party is propagating the ideas of The John Birch Society. In an article entitled "The John Birch Society's Reality," Reinbach noted that the JBS is "a group Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley Jr once thought too extreme, but which has since become the intellectual seed bank of the right." Reinbach warned his fellow leftists that "if you really want to understand why so many Republicans are the way they are these days, an outline of JBS beliefs is a good place to start." The columnist from the highly trafficked left-wing website then goes into a long excerpt from one of JBS Founder Robert Welch's writings in 1966: "The one great job left for the Communists is the subjugation of the people of the United States," wrote Welch. "So their exhaustive strategy for achieving their final goal includes the following methods."
Some people are hoping that President Obama's plan will get the economy out of the doldrums and start providing jobs for the unemployed. Others are hoping that the Republicans' plan will do the trick. Those who are truly optimistic hope that Democrats and Republicans will both put aside their partisanship and do what is best for the country. Almost nobody seems to be hoping that the government will leave the economy alone to recover on its own. Indeed, almost nobody seems at all interested in looking at the hard facts about what happens when the government leaves the economy alone, compared to what happens when politicians intervene. The grand myth that has been taught to whole generations is that the government is "forced" to intervene in the economy when there is a downturn that leaves millions of people suffering. The classic example is the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Votes in a republic must be counted honorably or elections are worse than useless. Political machine after the Civil War learned the tools for stealing votes en masse. Immigrants not conversant in English, and leaning upon the largess of local governments for a wide range of help, could be instructed how to vote and be trusted to do so. The rise of voter blocs, in which certain groups of Americans could be reliably expected to vote for certain political parties, made the legitimate function of elections — creating uncertainty about who will hold office — weak. Moreover, when elections are bought or are stolen, then the “winner” can claim not only to hold the political offices that his gang won in the election, but also can don the mantle of that vague and potentially dangerous title “champion of the people” (or something like that). And the artificial creation of a democracy in our nation, rather than a republic, has inured us to the myth that the majority can determine right and wrong.
The CNN/Tea Party Express presidential debate September 12 featured a staple question of the Ron Paul candidacy — the Federal Reserve Bank — but didn't give Representative Paul a chance to weigh in on the nation's central bank. When a Tea Party member asked a question about whether the Federal Reserve should be audited, Paul was not asked to comment on the question. Paul is the author and primary sponsor of the main Federal Reserve Audit bill, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act (H.R. 459) in the House. His son, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) is the sponsor of the Senate version of the bill (S. 202). Paul's bill won every House Republican and many Democrats as co-sponsors during the last Congress, and he has 176 co-sponsors for his bill thus far in the current Congress, including fellow presidential candidate Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.
The CNN/Tea Party Express debate continued to expose the difference between Texas Representative Ron Paul and the rest of the Republican field on the issue of America's multiplying foreign wars. An audience member asked the candidates if any defense spending cuts should be considered. Newt Gingrich began the foreign policy and military-spending discussion with an alarmist and unrealistic statement that "I think we are at the edge of an enormous crisis in national security. I think that we are greatly underestimating the threat to this country. And I think the day after we celebrated the 10th anniversary of 9/11, we should be reminded exactly what is at stake if a foreign terrorist gets a nuclear weapon into this country." Of course, only a handful of nation-states have nuclear weapons of any kind. And the ability to make easily transportable nuclear weapons is perhaps limited to the United States, Russia, and Britain.
Texas Governor Rick Perry continued to take fire from his rivals in the September 12 CNN/Tea Party Express debate on the issue of mandating Gardasil injections for 12-year-old girls by executive order. And the Texas Governor defended legislating by executive order. Fellow Texan Congressman Ron Paul, who is a medical doctor, said the worst part of Perry's decision was not the medicinal part of the decision but how he ignored the legislative branch in mandating the STD inoculation designed to prevent cervical cancer. "That is what is so bad," Paul stressed. "I made a promise that as President I would never use the executive order to legislate." Paul added: "Some executive orders are legal. When the President executes proper function of the presidency, like moving troops and other things, yes it's done with an executive order. But the executive order should never be used to legislate."
When President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law in 2010, he surely did not foresee the resistance with which his new law would be met. States have lined up to sue the federal government over the law. Some have introduced legislation nullifying ObamaCare or have refused federal grants for setting up its mandated insurance exchanges. One might expect such resistance in more conservative states such as Oklahoma and Florida — but in New York, a state that went nearly two-to-one for Obama in 2008 and has a popular Democratic Governor? It’s true. According to the New York Times, Republicans in Albany are doing their level best to see to it that the Empire State does not accept federal grants to establish an insurance exchange — despite the fact that failure to set up an exchange could precipitate federal intervention to create one and deprive the state of federal dollars to get it started. The Newspaper of Record recaps the situation thus:
JBS Facebook JBS Twitter JBS YouTube JBS RSS Feed