“Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants.” —Alexander Hamilton
“Science is the search for truth—it is not a game in which one tries to beat his opponent, to do harm to others. We need to have the spirit of science in international affairs, to make the conduct of international affairs the effort to find the right solution, the just solution of international problems, not the effort by each nation to get the better of other nations, to do harm to them when it is possible.” —Linus Pauling
“Kenneth Lowe is a young man with a message—and a rather stark message at that. He has written a powerful essay that serves as an indictment of his parents’ generation. The issue is divorce and the emotion is intense. Writing in his college newspaper, Lowe holds nothing back in making his argument. ‘If there’s one thing I need no citation or research to prove,’ he asserts, ‘it’s that our parents have done a pretty horrendous job bringing us up. I mean this as a whole, and not necessarily every single parent individually.’ ‘I have experienced divorce myself from the child’s point of view,’ he says, ‘and it isn’t anything I’d care to inflict on anybody else.’ He went on to predict that his generation would do much harm if they ‘repeat the misbehavior’ of their parents. That is language from the heart—language meant to get attention and make a point. Did it get your attention?” —Albert Mohler
“After four years of war in Iraq, some Christians are more insistent in their claim that the Bible requires pacifism. Some say that if we gave peace a chance, we’d live happily ever after. Others, aware of the presence of international murderers, still say we should not resist them, for Jesus did not resist his. What to make of this? For one thing, it runs counter to much of the Bible, where God and Israel regularly resist evil. In the book of Exodus, when Egypt’s pharaoh mandated slavery and ordered infanticide, God liberated the Israelites and destroyed the Egyptian army. In the book of Judges, God regularly ordained leaders to fight back against oppression... The New Testament is not pro-militant, but it’s also not anti-militant. The apostle Paul wrote that civil government is to wield the sword for justice. Although arguments from silence can be misleading, it’s worth noting that Jesus and Peter commended Roman centurions and did not tell them to go and sin no more... Many great students of the Bible—Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and Calvin, for example—saw some form of war as inevitable, because of what the Bible teaches about the depravity of human nature. Assuming that we would always have fighting, Christians developed codes of ‘just war’ that emphasized the use of necessary means of warfare but the avoidance of savagery. ‘Just war’ theory was also pragmatic: Leaders were to ask whether success was likely.” —Marvin Olasky
“[I]t doesn’t require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? Such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, inalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.” —Ronald Reagan
“Thinking about the Constitution as a guide to policy has almost gone out of style, except in the appointment of judges and the current debate over war powers, a welcome throwback, in its way. One would have to go back to the Reagan era, and before that to the 1960s, to find Republican leaders opposing major government programs on constitutional grounds. But the alternative to reviving constitutionalism is to make policy with no limits except for the judges’ whims, and with no guide except our leaders’ visions, distilled from their constituents’ desires. The alternative to constitutionalism, in other words, is to play politics according to the Democrats’ rules. That’s a losing game...[C]onservative candidates might start to change the rules and play a winning game, beginning with national defense. Granted, you cannot deduce defense policy from the Constitution, but it does convey a sense of priorities and the means (an energetic executive) to pursue them. National defense is the national government’s most urgent and fundamental priority... But conservatives ought to do better than that. National defense is central to constitutionalism in a way that entitlement spending is not. Defense spending needs to grow dramatically, and if that forces a hard look at entitlements and domestic discretionary spending, all the better.” —Charles Kesler
“If you establish that the Earth is warming, it doesn’t necessarily follow that we have a moral duty to reduce emissions. What should follow is an informed debate about the costs and benefits of various policies to address that warming—reducing emissions is just one possible answer. Another debate should focus on those policies’ economic costs. Al Gore doesn’t want to have those debates, because the majority of evidence suggests that emissions reduction will be very costly and will have little effect... Meanwhile, 2 billion people around the world go without electricity. About 3 million die each year because of fumes given off by primitive stoves. The U.S. economy sneezes when gasoline hits $3 a gallon. If we have a moral duty, it’s to keep energy affordable here and to expand access to it overseas. That’s the real moral truth, however inconvenient for Al Gore.” —Iain Murray
Yesterday was the 
