Columnist.
The president, who might not be fully acquainted with the pertinent Supreme Court case law, says the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel was unconstitutional.
This, one of the pleasures of being a conservative, is not for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 28. She recently won the Democratic nomination — effectively, election — in a Bronx and Queens congressional district, running as a "democratic socialist."
As the president prepares, if this time he does prepare, for his second summit, note all that went wrong at the first. If he does as badly in his July 16 meeting with Vladimir Putin in Finland as he did with Kim Jong Un in Singapore, the consequences could be catastrophic.
The Supreme Court is especially admirable when correcting especially deplorable prior decisions, as with the 1954 school desegregation decision rejecting a 1896 decision's "separate but equal" doctrine. It did so again last Wednesday, overturning a 41-year-old precedent inimical to the First Amendment.
As many conservatives saw it, Justice Anthony Kennedy's 1988 ascent to the nation's highest bench was reason for only muted celebration, if any, because he settled into the seat that his nominator, President Ronald Reagan, had first tried to fill with the conservatives' favorite jurist, Robert Bork.
Timothy Carpenter's interest in smartphones has had two unintended consequences.
Amid the carnage of Republican misrule in Washington, there is this glimmer of good news: The family-shredding policy along the southern border, which was merely the most telegenic recent example of misrule, clarified something.
When he was asked how to become a columnist, Charles Krauthammer would say, with characteristic drollery, "First, you go to medical school."
"This," exclaimed Margaret Thatcher, thumping Friedrich Hayek's 500-page tome The Constitution of Liberty on a table in front of some Conservative Party colleagues, "is what we believe." It also is what Bill Weld believes, which is why he aspires to be the Libertarian Party's 2020 presidential candidate.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) wonders: "Is there any doubt that America would view a foreign nation firing missiles at targets on American soil as an act of war?" His question might be pertinent to why the Singapore summit happened, and what, if anything, was changed by it. The question certainly is relevant to constitutional government as it pertains — if it still does pertain — to war.
Karl Marx was no more mistaken than usual when he said that historic people and events appear twice, first as tragedy, then as farce.
Back when the Soviet Union had a first-rate nuclear arsenal but a ramshackle third-world economy that produced no consumer goods other than vodka and caviar that anyone elsewhere would buy, the nation was disparaged as "Upper Volta with rockets."
"Loose lips sink ships" was a World War II slogan warning Americans against inadvertently disclosing important secrets, such as troop ships' sailing schedules. On Monday, the Supreme Court showed that loose lips can sink cases.
Within 17 days in the autumn of 1975 — first in Sacramento, then in San Francisco — two separate handgun-wielding women attempted to assassinate the president.
Franklin Roosevelt, afflicted by the disease at age 39, died in April 1945 at the polio recuperation facility he had created in Warm Springs, Georgia. Before then, Mitch McConnell living in Five Points, Alabama, began going there for treatment for the polio that struck him at age 2, in 1944.
No elaborate catechism is required to determine if someone is a conservative. A single question, as simple as it is infallible, suffices: For whom would you have voted in the presidential election of 1912?
America's government declares "war" promiscuously — on poverty, on drugs, on cancer, etc. — except when actually going to war, which the nation has done often since it last declared war (on June 5, 1942, on Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary).
On election night 2016, Mark Schlissel, the University of Michigan's president, addressed more than 1,000 students, declaring that the 90 percent of them who had favored the losing candidate had rejected "hate."
From Scotland, where Adam Smith pioneered systematic thinking about economics, comes an adjective, "carnaptious," that fits people who are allergic to economic euphoria. It means cantankerous.
Among the recent garbled effusions from today's temporary president — cheer up; they are all temporary — was one that concerned something about which he might not have thought as deeply as the subject merits.
