ActRight

This is something you’re going to be hearing a lot about over the next several days. Donald Trump recently made a bombshell revelation that could make you qu...

Hold your nose, here comes some cold water...

The national epidemic of college children being triggered by pro-Donald Trump chalk messages has continued anew, with students at the University of Michigan

VIDEO-The White House website censored, then pulled, a video of French Pres. Francois Hollande saying that “Islamist terrorism” is at the “roots of terrorism.”

On Thursday, conservative firebrand and Daily Wire editor-in-chief Ben Shapiro crashed another safe space; this time it was at Virginia Tech. The event was well-publicized by the Young America’s Foundation at VTech. The group adorned the campus with posters advertising Shapiro’s speech. Even when a few of the fliers were torn down by peevish social justice warriors, the conservative student group took the provocations in stride, enthusiastically distributing more fliers that included sardonic pronouncements such as “The Left’s Worst Nightmare: Facts” and “Crybabies!”

Rove's suggestion — he never named any names — blew up Twitter Thursday night.

The team at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics threw its usual caution to the wind on Thursday and took its best guess at how the 50 states and D.C. would break when Electoral College votes are parceled out, assuming the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton and the GOP nominates Trump. It’s not a pretty picture.

Conference sessions include "Modern responses to systemic anti-black racism & white supremacy," and "The basics of privilege for those who just don't quite get it.”

This is In Real Terms, a column analyzing the week in economic news. Comments? Criticisms? Ideas for future columns? Email me or drop a note in the comments. Give credit to the “Fight for $15” move…

We are sometimes skeptical about Republican presidential contenders who embrace the pro-life position late in life at a convenient moment, as Donald Trump did a few years ago when he was 64 years of age. Mitt Romney, for whom we have a great deal of respect, changed his mind, too, right around the time he started his journey from leadership of a liberal state to leadership of a conservative party. But sometimes Saul does fall off his ass, and there is more joy in Heaven. #ad#Donald Trump, however, does not seem to have thought this through. (Of course, we could write that about Trump and practically any issue.) Asked by Chris Matthews about the particulars of outlawing abortion, Trump insisted that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women obtaining abortions. After a sustained barrage of criticism from his presidential rivals and from some anti-abortion groups, Trump changed his position, insisting instead that punishment would be handed down to those performing illegal abortions rather than to those suborning them. In other words, Trump, who insists that he will surround himself with the best advisers in order to be thoroughly prepared for anything the presidency might throw at him, was completely unready to give a thoughtful answer to a question in a 43-year-old controversy about which a great deal of intelligent and humane commentary has been published. He managed to damage his own campaign, the Republican party, and the pro-life cause at a single go. That is one of the problems with his masquerading as a conservative, something he isn’t. He doesn’t understand conservatism or what conservatives think, and so he goes from moment to moment saying whatever he thinks will be of maximum benefit to himself in any given context. Punishment sounds tough, and tough is Trump’s brand. #share#In general, pro-life groups advocate punishment only for the abortionists, understanding that women faced with an unwanted pregnancy are in a very difficult position, that in some circumstances the worst of those difficulties are beyond their immediate control, and that the vulnerability of their position counsels a humane stance even when they have gone to the horrifying length of seeking elective homicide for their unborn children. American anti-abortion laws generally exempted the mothers for these reasons and others. But whatever your position is on that approach, you should probably have figured it out well before you run for president as a purportedly pro-life candidate. Trump managed to damage his own campaign, the Republican party, and the pro-life cause at a single go. Trump likes to compare himself to Ronald Reagan, who also changed his mind over the years on some important issues, including abortion. But Reagan also had a long career as an activist and a governor before becoming the Republican standard-bearer, during which time he bothered to read a great deal of serious policy literature and to figure out what he actually believed and why. There were 16 long years between Reagan’s “A Time for Choosing” speech and his election to the presidency. Donald Trump was not a principled conservative activist 16 years ago, or 16 months ago. And you’d be a fool to believe that you can predict what position he’ll take 16 minutes from now, on abortion or anything else.

If there is one thing that is bipartisan in Washington, it is brazen hypocrisy. Currently there is much indignation being expressed by Democrats because the Republican-controlled Senate refuses to hold confirmation hearings on President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

I'm sure with enough time with Google, one can find an accomplishment that goes beyond "got elected," but for a Democratic figurehead who is cheerleading for a Democratic presidential hopeful, this is just embarrassing.

Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES This is? one of the more unbelievable segments you will ever see on TV. I?ve said it a million times ? not everyone who supports Trump is a garbage human being, but the folks who are leading the Trump Train in public are universally garbage. Just unmitigated trash. And I won?t apologize for saying it. I swear, these people are going | Read More

Editor’s Note: In the new issue of National Review, we have a piece by Jay Nordlinger, on what it’s like to have a friend running for president. The friend in question is Ted Cruz. Mr. Nordlinger has expanded that piece this week in Impromptus. For the first two parts of the series, go here and here. It concludes today. Ted announced for president last March. He was the first to announce. I think his attitude was, “Yes, I’m running, so why be coy?” Also, there might have been some advantage in going first — some extra media attention. I saw him that very night, in New York. I said, “Wasn’t it just yesterday that we were talking at Earl Campbell’s Barbecue? Are you really in the U.S. Senate? Are you really running for president?” I was not surprised at Ted’s rise, certainly. I was surprised at the sheer speed of it. In due course, I made a disclosure. I said, in essence, that I was Ted’s friend and supported him — and would help him, when asked. I also said, “The fact that I am pro-Ted does not mean that I am anti-others.” I admire Jeb, Marco, Carly … I think the Republican party has serious talent. Which is part of what makes Donald Trump as frontrunner so tragic. Anyway, I made my disclosure. Transparency City, as Bush 41 might say. Everything nice and out in the open. Let me flash-forward to Iowa — the first contest of the race. I was not there on the night of the caucuses. I saw Ted a few days before, in Des Moines. But not on the night of the caucuses itself. I was back in New York, working. I was at the Metropolitan Opera, covering a performance of Donizetti’s Maria Stuarda (for The New Criterion). At intermission, I checked my phone. A friend had texted, saying that Ted was looking pretty good in Iowa. I did not get my hopes up. It was my impression that Ted had taken on water in the days leading up to the caucuses — with Trump’s birtherism and all that. After the opera, I repaired to a restaurant across the street. My friend had texted again. Perhaps not believing that I would believe her words, she texted me a photo of her television screen: Cruz Wins. Honestly, I gulped. I was numb for a second or two. Just the other day, or so it seemed, Ted was crashing on my couch, with his cowboy boots to the side. Now he had won the Iowa caucuses? Are you kidding me? It was surreal, sobering, thrilling, and believable, all at once, if you will excuse that jumble. At times in this race, I have been Joe Detached Journalist. At other times, I have been Joe Subjective. I have lived and died with Ted. During the first several debates, I “live-tweeted.” I did not say much — did not tweet much — about Ted. But I commented on the other candidates, in a neutral, often amused way. There came a time when I could not do that anymore — I was in too deep. I wanted Ted to win, period. I felt it keenly. No more live-tweeting for me. Even during those first debates, I was like a nervous stage mother. Luckily, my candidate was very good at it — very good at debating, and the rest of campaigning. When Ted is maligned, I feel it, personally. I don’t claim that he walks on water. And I don’t claim that the other candidates are villains. I can be Ted’s worst critic. But make no mistake, he has been maligned. This “Liar, liar” charge? “Lyin’ Ted,” as Trump says? It is a nasty charge, and a false one. I’m sure that, on occasion, Ted stretches, as all politicians stretch, and all people do. But “Liar, liar”? That is a lie in itself. #ad#Take this Ben Carson business — the notion that Ted played a dirty trick in Iowa, robbing votes from Carson. Ted is not-guilty in this affair. Indeed, innocent. I could take you almost through a tick-tock (that is, a moment-by-moment description of what happened). Then there was the Marco Rubio story — the false story that one of Ted’s staffers, Rick Tyler, saw and then circulated. Rick immediately regretted it. And apologized for it. Ted fired him, and it was damn hard to do. Rick is a wonderful guy, who made a mistake. MSNBC viewers lucked out. What I mean is, Rick is now an analyst for that network. Anyway, when you see things from the inside, or have a glimpse at the inside, you have a better understanding. And the false caricatures are irksome. Sometimes infuriating. Above, I wrote, “I don’t claim that the other candidates are villains.” Let me qualify that: When Donald Trump went after Heidi Cruz, in his loathsome way? Villain territory. “You’re in the arena,” I remarked to Ted at one point. I suspect he knows every word of that Teddy Roosevelt passage. Cruz is absorbing the blows, and striking them. He is the target of jeers, and the object of cheers. Some of my friends and colleagues can’t stand Ted. And they are not shy about telling me. Some days, I am serene. I try to explain, defend, and persuade. Other days, I bristle, and want to growl, “Don’t vote for him then. Leave me alone.” Whatever the day, I need to remind myself that, to the world, Ted Cruz is a presidential candidate. Not my friend, but a presidential candidate, and thus the fairest of game. Still … Obviously, the Cruz style is not for everyone. But I can say this, to conservatives (and to anyone else, for that matter): If he is president, he will do everything humanly possible to repeal Obamacare. And to prevent Iran from going nuclear. And to do other hard, vital things. I don’t know if these things can be done. But I feel sure that, if they can, Ted will do them. He will go the last mile, and beyond. Like everyone else, he likes popularity more than unpopularity. But if popularity clashes with the right course of action, popularity will have to go. Ted is used to opposition and scorn. And he would do anything — walk through fire, chew on glass — to keep this country free. Pardon the campaign rhetoric, but it’s true. At the moment, it looks like Ted has a steep road to beat Trump for the Republican nomination. I would not bet the ranch on Ted. But I would not bet a cent against him. He has defied odds before. And no one works harder, and few work as cannily. Say he wins the nomination and goes on to beat Hillary Clinton, taking the presidential oath of office on January 20, 2017. I will be amazed. But you’ll know what I mean, having read this series, when I say, I won’t be surprised.

How many American politicians do the Saudis own?

NEW YORK – Donald Trump?s suggestion in an interview Wednesday that former Breitbart News reporter Michelle Fields pressed battery charges against his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, because ?she likes it,? echoed his campaign?s initial suggestion that Fields had a history of such allegations against public figures. Two days after the March 8 incident, Trump campaign [?]

Social networking forum reddit on Thursday removed a section from its site used to tacitly inform users it had never received a certain type of U.S. government surveillance request, suggesting the platform is now being asked to hand over customer data under a secretive law enforcement authority.

Europe can afford to defend itself.

For years President Obama has escaped scrutiny in a corruption scandal where his former senate seat was offered for sale. But now all that may be ending, thanks to a lawsuit that is seeking the release of long-hidden records from a secret FBI interview with Obama and his closest aides. Judicial...

Professor John McAdams: 'Of Course I'm Not Going to Apologize' for Defending a Student's Freedom of Speech

Today, the editorial board of The Daily Wire endorses Donald J. Trump for president. We have been convinced by long months of persuasive argument from Trump’s supporters, including informing us that we are the sort of conservatives who enjoy watching our wives have sex with other men, telling us that we are social justice warriors for defending women from smears, and reminding us that we are shekelmasters in the pay of Big Oil Cruz Supporters™.

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday approved a proposal to expand a telephone subsidy for low-income Americans to include Internet access, after a deal to cap the cost of the plan collapsed.

HOUSTON, Texas — The Cruz for President campaign released the following video announcing that Donald Trump has accepted Ted Cruz’s invitation for a one-on-one debate:

Is there anything behind the ceaseless attacks on the Texas senator?

Although academia differs from the settings explored by groupthink theorists, it exhibits many of the same tendencies and failings. One result is the relative absence of classical-liberal and conservative viewpoints among humanities and social sciences professors, especially in the more elite departments.