America's attention will soon be consumed by the 50th Super Bowl. Just before and after that event, the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primaries will consume the attention of the nation's political junkies.
Two items in the news this week highlighted a reality that politicians hate to admit. While they pretend to lead the nation, they are not in charge
At the Republican Presidential debate earlier this week, Texas Senator Ted Cruz did something unusual for a politician -- he gave a straightforward answer to a question. Yes, Cruz made clear, if the Bank of America was on the brink, he would let it fail.
Following the widely panned Republican presidential debate on CNBC, the New York Times came out with an editorial calling on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to withdraw from the race. Much of the column was a typical partisan assault, but one line jumped out to highlight how little the Times editorial board understands the mood of the country.
Politicians from both major political parties often talk of empowering the middle class or some other group of voters. But in reality, they're just seeking power for themselves. It is important, of course, that we have the right to vote. But empowerment comes from freedom, not democracy.
Heading into a presidential election year, it's important to remember that political involvement is but one of many ways we can work together to solve problems. Sometimes it's the best approach; sometimes it's not.
Things look much different among the Democrats this time around. The only similarity is that Clinton is the dominant front-runner. This time, there is no Obama among her challengers. When she took the debate stage in Nevada earlier this week, Clinton towered above the rest in debate skill, poise and stature.
In the United States these days, about 95 percent of all new "laws" are written by bureaucrats rather than approved by Congress. A pair of recent news stories documents the dangers of bureaucrats gone wild.
Despite the oversized field and non-traditional candidates, the battle for the Republican presidential nomination is starting to shape up in familiar ways. There will be a champion of the establishment wing taking on the champion of the party base to determine the nominee.
To many in Washington, there's little question that the 2016 presidential election should feature a dynasty rematch between the Clinton and Bush families. To most outside of Washington, that's the last match-up they want to see.
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is the latest to get burned trying to stand in the way of the sharing economy.
Many years ago, I visited Cambodia with my family. One day, a local resident took us to a small village of 53 huts far off the beaten path. In many ways, it was closer to the 13th century than the 21st. It was truly an eye-opening experience.
The Fourth of July we celebrate this weekend heralds a document proclaiming both our nation's independence and our unwavering commitment to freedom.
What sometimes seem like epic battles to reshape the world generally fade to irrelevance very quickly.
The sad scenes playing out in Baltimore are made sadder by the fact that more such incidents are likely over the coming years.
I am far more pessimistic about our political system than most Americans. At the same time, I am very optimistic about the future of our nation. That may seem like an odd combination to some, but I am optimistic because I recognize that Washington, D.C., does not lead the nation.
This was a big week for the political press. That means it was also a good week for highlighting how the world of the political elite is so out of touch with the world of everyday Americans.
In recent weeks, I've written about how the "Bootleggers and Baptists" dynamic corrupts regulatory politics. Bruce Yandle developed this concept decades ago. He observed that Prohibition became reality because Baptists wanted people to stop drinking while the ban on legal alcohol put money in the Bootlegger's pockets. The do-gooders succeeded only because the money-grubbers joined their effort.
Heading into the 2014 elections, some Democrats think they have found a way to minimize the political fallout from the president's health care law. They have convinced themselves that voters are more interested in fixing the law rather than repealing it.