Tim Donner

In the end, it is more often than not true that a deal criticized by both sides – in this case, both hawks and doves – is probably a fair deal, or at least the best available deal. While it would be oh-so tempting to avenge a country openly committed to the death of America and bomb it to kingdom come, the president must consider the cascading consequences and evidently doesn't like what the aftermath would look like. The MOU represents a chance, not a blank check. You probably never expected Donald Trump and John Lennon to be incorporated into the same sentence, but here goes: All Trump is saying is give peace a chance.

Socialism is, and has always been, an utterly irrational movement built on a foundation of sand. It has failed everywhere it has been tried. Everywhere. Chuck Schumer knows it. So do Nancy Pelosi and Hakeem Jeffries. They all know, as sure as the sun rises in the east, that socialism now on the march will wreck their party. These are the top leaders of the Democrats, and no matter your view of their ideology, they understand politics as well as, or better than, anyone. And they are at the barricades, devoting much or most of their energy to shedding the party of scandal-plagued socialist Graham Platner and the other extremists, endorsing every failed establishment candidate beaten by the far left in New York. The socialist horse has left the barn, and it will take a herculean effort to put it back.

We might have thought after the Holocaust of the 1940's, which resulted in the slaughter of some six million Jews, that nothing like it could ever happen again. It must thus be shocking for everyday Americans to witness the ever-more-naked antisemitism from those on the far left, as they seek to repeat history with open demonization of Jews and talk of wiping Israel off the face of the earth. But any reading of history reveals that Jew hatred has been part and parcel of socialism since its inception. In fact, while it is sometimes thinly veiled, stirring up resentment against Jews has been an indispensable element of socialism in its many forms over the decades.

As we celebrate 250 years of the great American experiment in ordered liberty, it is instructive to remember that, in the late 18th century, it was hardly a foregone conclusion that the original 13 colonies-turned-states could forge a workable alliance. It was difficult enough to convince the many loyalists to England – maybe half the colonial population at the time – that a revolution was necessary, but getting the colonies to agree to a single document without surrendering their autonomy became a herculean task.

Who would have ever thought we would place preeminent economist Milton Friedman and Christian nationalism in the same sentence? But here we are, after Vice President JD Vance made head-spinning remarks on two fronts that are bound to stir up a hornet's nest as the two parties consider who should succeed Donald Trump in the White House. In fact, the VP provided valuable ammunition for both fellow Republicans who might challenge him for the 2028 presidential nomination and the eventual Democratic Party candidate.

No issue more accurately reflects the relentlessly leftward direction of the Democratic Party than the nation of Israel. Democrats have evolved from bipartisan supporters of the Jewish state for decades to open antagonists seeking to weaken, if not destroy, it. In 2016, exactly zero Democrats in the US House of Representatives voted against funding for the state of Israel. In 2024, 37 Democrats voted to cut off aid. But this week, a whopping 103 House Democrats voted to terminate all economic and military aid to our longtime ally in the Middle East, while another ten brave souls voted present.

could rightly be accused of refusing to exit the stage, but she was never going to run for president again after 2016. This time around, Democrats writ large are dealing with something far more serious as twice-failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris plans her return to the stage, rested, ready, and eager to reiterate how getting steamrolled by Donald Trump while blowing through $2 billion in 107 days was not her fault.

With so much attention these days focused on a new breed of socialists infiltrating the Democratic Party, it has been easy to overlook the decline of traditional liberalism, a hallmark of the party for almost a century. Liberalism was largely welcomed during the Great Depression of the 1930s and the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, but it was increasingly scorned over the following decades. After Ronald Reagan won a landslide victory over Jimmy Carter in 1980 and launched his revolution to reduce the size, scope, and reach of the federal government, the word liberal became an insult employed ad nauseum by Republicans.

While it is true that polls conducted more than two years out from a presidential election are hardly indicative of which candidates will rise, fall, and ultimately win or lose, they do serve some useful purposes. Primarily, they test the staying power of prospective presidents, some of whom will find hope in the early numbers while others will see the unfortunate handwriting on the wall and take a pass.

A one-time progressive warrior blows the whistle on how the party shunned indispensable voters. The story, in brief