At a ceremony this past Thursday in Washington, D.C., my friend Peter Berkowitz was awarded a 2017 Bradley Prize. Berkowitz’s body of work is important, in part, because it constitutes a powerful reply to so many of our reigning intellectual orthodoxies.
To understand the sometimes glaring gaps between candidate Obama’s promises and President Obama’s policies, it is useful to appreciate an old tension in American progressivism. . . .
This week on Uncommon Knowledge, a conversation with author and historian Amity Shlaes on her new book, Great Society: A New History.
Be careful when one uses the superlative case—best, most, -est, etc.—or evokes end-of-the-world imagery...
On July 29, 1981, barely six months into his presidency and in the face of an economic crisis of historic proportions, Ronald Reagan succeeded in persuading both houses of Congress to pass dramatic tax cuts that set the stage for nearly three decades of vigorous economic growth...
The decades of the 1980s and 1990s seem to offer two different fiscal models for promoting economic growth. The 1980s under President Reagan suggest that cutting taxes is more important than balancing the budget. The 1990s under President Clinton suggest the importance of balancing the budget with moderate tax increases. Yet the results in each decade were similar: sustained economic growth. President George W. Bush has clearly been following the Reagan model in his first term: enacting large tax cuts even as the federal budget approaches record deficits. But has the Bush team taken the correct lessons from our recent economic past? Do the Bush policies promote long-term growth or jeopardize it?
In the midst of the Great Recession California students protest in favor of themselves. . . .
Govern moderately, or the governed will turn against you. Clinton learned it. Will Obama? By Peter Berkowitz.
What happens when South Korean students take a close look at American democracy. By Peter Berkowitz.
The Arab struggles may be new, but American goals are not. Three recent presidents laid the groundwork. By Peter Berkowitz.
What did the midterm elections prove? That Americans yearn for enduring principles—and dislike being pushed around. By Peter Berkowitz.
Clarity of purpose is only half of a winning political strategy. The other half involves a clear understanding of the possible. By Peter Berkowitz.
Partnerships with religious groups may have been dismissed as a stepchild of the Bush administration, but they appear to have a bright future all the same. By David Davenport.
With Architects of Ruin, Peter Schweizer again delivers a knockout punch of a book that is the must read of the season for conservatives and should be a main topic of conversation for conservative media. . . .
Hoover Institution research fellow Peter Schweizer has a potential blockbuster of a new book hitting the shelves Oct. 6 entitled "Architects of Ruin: How Big Government liberals wrecked the global economy and how they will do it again if no one stops them."...
Hoover Institution fellow, Peter Robinson, speaks with Fred Thompson about his candidacy for President of the United States. Robinson delves into the key issues facing America today, the politics of running for president, and the source of Thompson's conservative views. (14:47) Video transcript
Richard Epstein, the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of the Property Rights, Freedom, and Prosperity Task Force, speaks to the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the Affordable Care Act.
Hoover fellow Epstein discusses the Libertarian Chronicles, the IRS, and Obamacare on the John Batchelor Show
Richard Epstein, the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of its Property Rights, Freedom, and Prosperity Task Force, weighs in on the IRS scandal and the unraveling of Obamacare.
Peter Robinson challenges Mark Krikorian to explain why America -- a nation of immigrants -- should now adopt anti-immigration policies. Krikorian responds by asserting that mass immigration is fundamentally incompatible with a modern society, that it causes a serious erosion of sovereignty, and that it creates a net economic burden on the government. Finally, he details the dangers of transnationalism and multiculturalism that are inherent in immigration today and gives his prescription for solving the problem. (34:52 ) Video transcript