R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator, a political and cultural monthly, which has been published since 1967.
Tyrrell founded The American Spectator (originally called The Alternative) in 1967 after receiving a master of arts in history from Indiana University, from which he also received his bachelor of arts in 1965. In 1979 Time Magazine named Emmett Tyrrell one of the 50 future leaders of America. In 1978, the U.S. Jaycees chose him as one of their "Ten Outstanding Young Americans" of the year. In 1977, he received the American Institute for Public Service's Award for the "Greatest Public Service Performed by an American 35 Years or Under." The same year, he was presented with the American Eagle Award of the Invest-In-America National Council.
Emmett Tyrrell currently serves as a member of the Academic Advisory Board of the United States Naval Academy. Emmett Tyrrell is also a member of the Japan-U.S. Friendship Commission.
Yet in all other respects I side with the pope, certainly on matters of faith and morals. On lesser matters, I have some quibbles. Purely as a managerial matter, would it not be better to allow priests to marry? I understand the economics of the problem. The Church is having a difficult time paying for one priest. At first glance, the economics would be even worse if the Church had to pay for a priest with a wife and children. But my guess is that each parish would find a way to make a go of their priests marrying. Would the married priest and his wife not be better able to run a parish school? At least that is my initial thought.
One candidate in the race for the Republican presidential nomination is not playing by the rules. He is rude and crude and having a very good time of it.
Thus we find ourselves in the Guggenheim, a vast building that, as far as I can see, has no right angles, arches or any columns that one usually associates with grand museums. It is a modern colossus, designed by Frank Gehry, a self-absorbed primate who has designed many modern colossi, and whose design for the Eisenhower Memorial in Washington, D.C., is now immobilized in controversy.
Known to The Spectator followers as the Baron Von Kannon, he was one of my dearest friends and wisest advisers for nearly 50 years. He will be a loss for me and for the conservative movement, but it was God's call.
I shall pose the question once again that I posed months ago: Why is the Democratic presidential field the field of AARP (American Association of Retired Persons), and where is the party's diversity?
That 1920s predecessor of President Bill Clinton has again been in the news and in a big way. Last week, the media resounded anew with delightful reports of President Warren Gamaliel Harding's nigh unto maniacal attraction to women, or at least to some women, during that period of American history that became known as the Roaring Twenties.
In the first paragraph of The New York Times' front-page story on Sunday, the Times said that because Megyn Kelly "questioned him forcefully at the Republican presidential debate," Donald Trump said she did it "because she was menstruating." He did not. Whether the Times was perpetrating a lie on its gullible readers or simply confused, I cannot say. In the next paragraph, readers can see for themselves what Trump actually said.
In addressing my old friend Vice President Joe Biden as he contemplates a run for the White House, I would ask him what he thinks of Hillary Clinton's chances for the presidency. In fact, what would he think of a Clinton presidency in the unlikely event she is nominated and wins? Do I hear four more years of Whitewaters, Travelgates, campaign finance violations, dubious pardons, Johnny Chungs, Charlie Tries and slutty cuties' feet protruding from behind the curtains?
The plot thickens! As we all know, the inspector general of the intelligence community has discovered that a small number of a small number of emails on Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal, albeit mysterious, server were, in fact, classified.
Every time Barack Obama pipes up, especially on a peripheral issue, he makes things worse -- no, not worse, appalling.
I cannot recall another time when American media have given so much aid and encouragement to a fledgling candidate as they have given to Donald Trump, and he is a billionaire. He does not need their help.
WASHINGTON -- Political observers are still speculating about whether the July 4th New York Times report on the loony biography of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was meant as a hit-job or an encomium.
If you dutifully read the weekend newspapers and watched the Sunday morning gasbags on television, I suspect you departed the chaos with a terrible headache. Possibly you departed for the bar.
The Republican Party, the political party of commerce (and of jobs!), has two aspiring candidates for the presidential nomination who are drawn from the business community. One evokes unwarranted snoozes; the other, rather astonishingly, evokes derision.
What did I tell you a couple of weeks ago? In fact, what have I been suggesting for months? Hillary Clinton is going to have a very tough time winning her party's nomination.
For a generation -- perhaps longer -- the liberals have been segregating Americans into smaller and smaller groups. Then they claim to be each group's unique champion.
Are American voters still suckers for identity politics?
Before he passed away recently, John M. Templeton, the distinguished physician and philanthropist, questioned: "Should we tolerate a public educational system with its entrenched self-interest which virtually every inner-city parent knows is destroying any hope or possibility of their children achieving meaningful opportunity in a 21st-century economy?"
WASHINGTON -- Last week, Prince Charles, in all likelihood the next monarch of Great Britain, suffered a defeat.
In this land of capitalist chaos, there is something quaint about Bernard Sanders, the senator from Vermont, running for the Democratic presidential nomination as a Socialist. He is not running as a liberal or a progressive, or even a vegetarian, but as a Socialist!