Is it remotely possible that the 2012 presidential election will be decided by an eight-foot-tall, bright yellow bird? I know it sounds ridiculous. But the liberal cognoscenti in this country are going absolutely gaga over Mitt Romney’s promise during last week’s presidential debate that he would end government funding of the Public Broadcasting System.

Bill Clinton is certainly full of himself these days. That might have something to do with the fact that no one is likely to ask why he hasn’t owned up to his share of the blame for the housing and financial bust.

Some Ron Paul supporters argue that a vote for either Romney or Obama is unacceptable, for even if one can be said to be not as bad as the other, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil — and it is always immoral to vote for evil. I challenge this reasoning in the light of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas.

There is this idea among many that we can get past apparent differences by concluding they don’t exist. This is reflected in the now common belief that racial distinctions are mere “social constructs.” And this theory isn’t just espoused by liberals, but has become so mainstream that even many conservatives echo it. But just as new research in the 1990s debunked the ‘60s-spawned “gender-neutrality” nonsense of the sameness of the sexes, there has long been research pointing to the reality of race.

President Barack Obama, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have at least one thing in common when it comes to Iran. All are guilty of flagrant self-contradiction.

Affiliates and Friends

Social Media