DOCSLIB.ORG

COURSE SYLLABUS US Politics and Foreign Policy in the Age of Trump

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

COURSE SYLLABUS U.S. Politics and Foreign Policy in the Age of Trump Central European University Fall 2020 4 Credits (8 ECTS Credits) Co-Instructors Erin Jenne, PhD Professor, International Relations Dept. [email protected] Levente Littvay, PhD Professor, Political Science Dept. [email protected] Teaching Assistants Michael Zeller, Doctoral Candidate, Political Science Dept. [email protected] Semir Dzebo Doctoral Candidate, International Relations Dept. [email protected] Important Note About the Course Format This course is designed for online delivery. It includes pre-recorded lectures, individual and group activities, a discussion forum where all class related questions can be discussed amongst the students and with the team of instructors. There is 1 hour and 40 minutes set aside each week for synchronous group activities. For these, if necessary, students will be grouped into a European morning (11 am - 12:40 pm CET) and evening (17:20 - 19:00 pm CET) session to accommodate potential timezone issues. (Around the time of the election, we may schedule more. And forget timezones, or sleep, on November 2, 3 and 4.) This course does not meet in person, but, nonetheless, the goal is to make it useful and fun. The course is open to CEU students on-site in Vienna or scattered anywhere across the globe. We welcome MA and PhD students from any department who wish to see the political science perspective on the elections and would like to get some hands on American Politics research experience. Course Description While most courses focus on either the domestic or the foreign policy aspect of U.S. politics, our starting assumption is that it is impossible to have a sound grasp of either without also taking the other into account. By integrating domestic politics and foreign policy, the course seeks to achieve a more holistic understanding of America’s role in the world since the end of the Cold War, while plotting out potential future trajectories - with a special focus on the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election. With this in mind, this course is divided into three main parts. We begin with a brief review of the different traditions or schools of thought concerning U.S. politics and foreign policy, mapping out the political institutions on the domestic level with a special focus on federalism versus states’ rights; separation of powers; sectional conflict and major Supreme Court cases that have shaped U.S. politics over the course of its history. The second part examines how U.S. politics plays out in elections and voter choice, political participation, electoral irregularities, political parties, and election campaigning. We also look at the broader context of U.S. domestic politics, including populism and nationalism; social conservatism and religion; economic inequality; race, gender, and age; and changing American demographics—examining how these features of society have changed st moving into the 21 ​ Century. As part of the course, students will engage in extensive training in the ​ recognition of populism, nationalism and social conservatism in US Governors’ political speeches and other texts in order to engage in original data collection and content analysis. This offers the students an invaluable opportunity for hands-on research experience, a great thing to put in their CV and a potentially rich letter of recommendation with concrete content, as part of an original data collection project from which the data will become a public resource with all the participants’ names on it. In the third part of the course, we turn to foreign policy—analyzing the backward and forward linkages between U.S. domestic politics and foreign policy and highlighting the ways in which these factors shape and are shaped by the 2020 elections. Students are encouraged to reflect on the extent to which the U.S. stands apart from previous (and future) global hegemons in its politics and foreign policy. The final seminar will be spent reflecting on what all of these elements mean for US politics and foreign policy in the age of Trump: do we see more continuity or change? Aims The course’s main aim is to provide students with a sound understanding of: 1. The main political debates that animate contemporary U.S. politics and foreign policy; 2. The main theoretical frameworks in social science used to explain U.S. politics and foreign policy; 3. How to test these competing explanations using evidence; 4. The policy ramifications of these different explanations; 5. The principal trends in U.S. politics and foreign policy. Learning Outcomes By the end of this course, students will be able to: · Make reasoned and informed arguments about events in U.S. politics and foreign policy and critically evaluate them; · Distinguish between political debates and social science debates concerning U.S. politics and foreign policy; · Identify what is unique about American politics versus what is common to all major countries or great powers; · Make an informed estimate of future trends in U.S. politics and/or foreign policy based on existing theories and evidence; · Argue convincingly for different sides of each major political debate in U.S. politics; · Identify interconnections between U.S. politics and foreign policy; · Conduct informed political analysis of U.S. elections and discuss the impact of elections on U.S. domestic and foreign policy; · Evaluate the relative effects of public opinion, demographic trends, geopolitical pressures, the media, and special interests and/or campaign finance on U.S. domestic and foreign policy. Course Requirements 1. Staying Informed and Active in the General Discussion - 10% 2. Reflection on Readings (Perusall) - 30% 3. Presentations - 20% 4. Peer feedback - 10% 5. Speech coding - 30% 1. As the course is heavily grounded in current events that relate to U.S. politics and foreign policy, with a particular focus on the upcoming presidential election in November, the students are expected to stay informed and actively discuss US Politics on our course forum. Potential information sources include online newspapers so as to keep up with current events Good sources include The New York ​ Times, Financial Times, The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ The Chicago Sun-Times, The Boston Globe, The Guardian, The Independent, and others. Additional ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ sources (including both right and left) include Harper’s, Mother Jones, The Nation, The New Republic, ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ The American Spectator, The American Prospect, Foreign Policy, Foreign Affairs, The National ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Interest, Policy Review, The Cato Journal, The Washington Times, and The Weekly Standard. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ (V/B)logs include The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, The Red State, Newsmax, Crooks and Liars, ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Democracy Now, and Media Matters. See OpenSecrets.org and Source Watch for information on ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ campaign finance and lobby dollars. FactCheck.org is particularly useful in assessing the truth of ​ ​ claims by politicians and pundits on either side of the aisle. Nate Silver’s fivethirtyeight website offers ​ ​ invaluable polling data on upcoming elections. (10%) 2. Readings are posted to Perusall, a community reading forum where students can comment and discuss all course readings. Your engagement in the discussion is a necessity as a substitute to in person meetings to make the social component of the reading and learning a reality. (30%) 3. and 4. A group of students will be responsible for researching a swing state about the local issues driving electoral politics. The research and predictions about the outcomes will be presented to the whole class (20%), in the form of a 10-12 minute video lecture close before the election. At the subsequent peer review and discussion about the presentation everyone is expected to be active (10%). 5. One of the goals of the class is to produce a resource based on original research, a dataset of Governor’s populism, nationalism and conservativism. We are going to train everyone in the class how to assess the level of populism, nationalism and conservatism of a political speech. Together with students at Brigham Young University we aim to code four speeches per each 4 year governance cycle by each governor going back to at least 2014 (two cycles), where two people will independently code every speech. To make this activity successful, we will need to find governor’s speeches based on a strict set of criteria (10%) and code their level of nationalism, conservatism and populism (20%). Once we are done with this activity, we will publish the dataset as a free resource to the general research community with credit given to all the coders. This exercise will offer invaluable research and data collection experience to all students involved. (Also, for anyone who did a good job which I expect everyone will, we can confidently offer everyone a solid letter of recommendation based on all this, in case it would ever be needed. It will not read like “the person took our course; they got a B+.”) Important note CEU is an American university that applies American standards of academic honesty. This means that beyond de jure stipulations in the University’s regulations, academic honesty standards are also, de facto applied. This is also graduate school where we are in the business of creating new knowledge. It is my personal firm conviction that knowledge creation cannot be based on theft or other inappropriate conduct. For these reasons, complete academic honesty is expected of everyone. Failure to comply with this requirement will result in automatic failure in this course and additional disciplinary action on higher levels. All assignments are to be done individually unless otherwise specified. This means, you may talk about how to do it. If this conversation takes place online, I recommend you use the course’s public forum for the benefit of everyone. But none of the actual work can be done in a group.
Recommended publications
  • The Iran National Intelligence Estimate: a Comprehensive Guide to What Is Wrong with the NIE James Phillips

    The Iran National Intelligence Estimate: a Comprehensive Guide to What Is Wrong with the NIE James Phillips

    No. 2098 January 11, 2008 The Iran National Intelligence Estimate: A Comprehensive Guide to What Is Wrong with the NIE James Phillips U.S. efforts to contain Iran and prevent it from attaining nuclear weapons have been set back by the release of part of the most recent National Intelligence Talking Points Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear program. “Iran: 1 • The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) uses Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities,” the unclassi- a narrow definition of Iran’s nuclear weapons fied summary of the key judgments of the NIE, con- program that is so restrictive that even offi- tained a stunning bombshell: the conclusion that Iran cials from the normally cautious Interna- halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. tional Atomic Energy Agency have expressed What prompted this reversal of intelligence analy- disagreement with its conclusions. sis is not known. The controversial report released on • The NIE mistakenly assumes that weaponiza- December 3, 2007, contained only a summary of key tion of the warhead is the key aspect of Iran’s judgments and excluded the evidence on which the nuclear program that constitutes a potential threat. judgments were made. However, many experts on intelligence, nuclear proliferation, and the Middle • The NIE understates the importance of East have charged that the NIE is critically flawed. Iran’s “civilian” uranium enrichment efforts to the development of nuclear weapons. This paper distills many of the criticisms against • The NIE does not address related military the Iran NIE and provides a list of articles for further developments, such as Iran’s ballistic missile reading on this important issue.
  • The Tea Party and the Muslim Brotherhood: Who They Are and How American News Media Gets It Wrong

    The Tea Party and the Muslim Brotherhood: Who They Are and How American News Media Gets It Wrong

    Jeremy Abrams The Tea Party and the Muslim Brotherhood: Who they are and How American News Media Gets it Wrong Jeremy Abrams 1 Table of Content I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 II. Defining Political Parties and their Role in Democracies ................................................................. 2 A. Generally ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 B. Structurally .................................................................................................................................................... 3 C. How the Tea Party and the Muslim Brotherhood Fit the Mold ................................................. 4 III. Brief Descriptions of the Tea Party and the Muslim Brotherhood ............................................. 4 A. The Tea Party ................................................................................................................................................ 5 1. History ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 2. The System in Which it Operates ..................................................................................................... 9 3. Official Status ........................................................................................................................................
  • Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda

    Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda

    Chapter 4 The right-wing media enablers of anti-Islam propaganda Spreading anti-Muslim hate in America depends on a well-developed right-wing media echo chamber to amplify a few marginal voices. The think tank misinforma- tion experts and grassroots and religious-right organizations profiled in this report boast a symbiotic relationship with a loosely aligned, ideologically-akin group of right-wing blogs, magazines, radio stations, newspapers, and television news shows to spread their anti-Islam messages and myths. The media outlets, in turn, give members of this network the exposure needed to amplify their message, reach larger audiences, drive fundraising numbers, and grow their membership base. Some well-established conservative media outlets are a key part of this echo cham- ber, mixing coverage of alarmist threats posed by the mere existence of Muslims in America with other news stories. Chief among the media partners are the Fox News empire,1 the influential conservative magazine National Review and its website,2 a host of right-wing radio hosts, The Washington Times newspaper and website,3 and the Christian Broadcasting Network and website.4 They tout Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson, and others as experts, and invite supposedly moderate Muslim and Arabs to endorse bigoted views. In so doing, these media organizations amplify harm- ful, anti-Muslim views to wide audiences. (See box on page 86) In this chapter we profile some of the right-wing media enablers, beginning with the websites, then hate radio, then the television outlets. The websites A network of right-wing websites and blogs are frequently the primary movers of anti-Muslim messages and myths.
  • Periodicalspov.Pdf

    Periodicalspov.Pdf

    “Consider the Source” A Resource Guide to Liberal, Conservative and Nonpartisan Periodicals 30 East Lake Street ∙ Chicago, IL 60601 HWC Library – Room 501 312.553.5760 ver heard the saying “consider the source” in response to something that was questioned? Well, the same advice applies to what you read – consider the source. When conducting research, bear in mind that periodicals (journals, magazines, newspapers) may have varying points-of-view, biases, and/or E political leanings. Here are some questions to ask when considering using a periodical source: Is there a bias in the publication or is it non-partisan? Who is the sponsor (publisher or benefactor) of the publication? What is the agenda of the sponsor – to simply share information or to influence social or political change? Some publications have specific political perspectives and outright state what they are, as in Dissent Magazine (self-described as “a magazine of the left”) or National Review’s boost of, “we give you the right view and back it up.” Still, there are other publications that do not clearly state their political leanings; but over time have been deemed as left- or right-leaning based on such factors as the points- of-view of their opinion columnists, the make-up of their editorial staff, and/or their endorsements of politicians. Many newspapers fall into this rather opaque category. A good rule of thumb to use in determining whether a publication is liberal or conservative has been provided by Media Research Center’s L. Brent Bozell III: “if the paper never met a conservative cause it didn’t like, it’s conservative, and if it never met a liberal cause it didn’t like, it’s liberal.” Outlined in the following pages is an annotated listing of publications that have been categorized as conservative, liberal, non-partisan and religious.
  • Juliana Geran Pilon Education

    Juliana Geran Pilon Education

    JULIANA GERAN PILON [email protected] Dr. Juliana Geran Pilon is Research Professor of Politics and Culture and Earhart Fellow at the Institute of World Politics. For the previous two years, she taught in the Political Science Department at St. Mary’s College of Maryland. From January 1991 to October 2002, she was first Director of Programs, Vice President for Programs, and finally Senior Advisor for Civil Society at the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), after three years at the National Forum Foundation, a non-profit institution that focused on foreign policy issues - now part of Freedom House - where she was first Executive Director and then Vice President. At NFF, she assisted in creating a network of several hundred young political activists in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. For the past thirteen years she has also taught at Johns Hopkins University, the Institute of World Politics, George Washington University, and the Institute of World Politics. From 1981 to 1988, she was a Senior Policy Analyst at the Heritage Foundation, writing on the United Nations, Soviet active measures, terrorism, East-West trade, and other international issues. In 1991, she received an Earhart Foundation fellowship for her second book, The Bloody Flag: Post-Communist Nationalism in Eastern Europe -- Spotlight on Romania, published by Transaction, Rutgers University Press. Her autobiographical book Notes From the Other Side of Night was published by Regnery/Gateway, Inc. in 1979, and translated into Romanian in 1993, where it was published by Editura de Vest. A paperback edition appeared in the U.S. in May 1994, published by the University Press of America.
  • Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J

    Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J

    STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 11 Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for Complex Operations, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, and Conflict Records Research Center. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Unified Combatant Commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Kathleen Bailey presents evidence of forgeries to the press corps. Credit: The Washington Times Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference By Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 11 Series Editor: Nicholas Rostow National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2012 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
  • Neoconservatives Among Us? Astudy of Former Dissidents' Discourse

    Neoconservatives Among Us? Astudy of Former Dissidents' Discourse

    43 L 62 Neoconservatives Among Us? A Study of Former Dissidents’ Discourse* JENI SCHALLER Abstract: Neoconservative political thought has been characterized as “distinctly American”, but could there be fertile ground for its basic tenets in post-communist Europe? This paper takes an initial look at the acceptance of the ideas of American neo- conservative foreign policy among Czech elites who were dissidents under the communist regime. Open-ended, semi-structured interviews with eight former dissidents were con- ducted and then analyzed against a background of some fundamental features of neocon- servative foreign policy. Discourse analysis is the primary method of examination of the texts. Although a coherent discourse among Czech former dissidents cannot be said to ex- ist, certain aspects reminiscent of American neoconservative thought were found. Key words: neoconservatism, Czech dissidents, foreign policy, discourse analysis I. INTRODUCTION Neoconservatism, as a strain of political thought in the United States, has been represented as “distinctly American” and Irving Kristol, often considered the “godfather” of neoconservatism, emphatically states “[t]here is nothing like neoconservatism in Europe” (Kristol 2003: 33). Analyst Jeffrey Gedmin writes that the “environment for neoconservatism as such is an inhospitable one” in Europe, especially Germany (Gedmin 2004: 291). The states of Cen- tral Europe, in contrast to many of the established continental EU members, represent a rather more pro-American stance. With groups of former dissi- dents whose political leanings are in part informed by the American anti- communist, pro-democracy policies of the 1970s and 1980s, could there be a more hospitable environment for neoconservative ideas in a Central Euro- pean state such as the Czech Republic? The Czech dissident community was not as extensive or well-organised as that in Poland or even Hungary, largely due to the post-1968 “normalisation” in Czechoslovakia.
  • Online Media and the 2016 US Presidential Election

    Online Media and the 2016 US Presidential Election

    Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Faris, Robert M., Hal Roberts, Bruce Etling, Nikki Bourassa, Ethan Zuckerman, and Yochai Benkler. 2017. Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Paper. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33759251 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA AUGUST 2017 PARTISANSHIP, Robert Faris Hal Roberts PROPAGANDA, & Bruce Etling Nikki Bourassa DISINFORMATION Ethan Zuckerman Yochai Benkler Online Media & the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is the result of months of effort and has only come to be as a result of the generous input of many people from the Berkman Klein Center and beyond. Jonas Kaiser and Paola Villarreal expanded our thinking around methods and interpretation. Brendan Roach provided excellent research assistance. Rebekah Heacock Jones helped get this research off the ground, and Justin Clark helped bring it home. We are grateful to Gretchen Weber, David Talbot, and Daniel Dennis Jones for their assistance in the production and publication of this study. This paper has also benefited from contributions of many outside the Berkman Klein community. The entire Media Cloud team at the Center for Civic Media at MIT’s Media Lab has been essential to this research.
  • The Tea Party Movement As a Modern Incarnation of Nativism in the United States and Its Role in American Electoral Politics, 2009-2014

    The Tea Party Movement As a Modern Incarnation of Nativism in the United States and Its Role in American Electoral Politics, 2009-2014

    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 10-2014 The Tea Party Movement as a Modern Incarnation of Nativism in the United States and Its Role in American Electoral Politics, 2009-2014 Albert Choi Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/343 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] The Tea Party Movement as a Modern Incarnation of Nativism in the United States and Its Role in American Electoral Politics, 2009-2014 by Albert Choi A master’s thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, The City University of New York 2014 i Copyright © 2014 by Albert Choi All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. ii This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Political Science in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. THE City University of New York iii Abstract The Tea Party Movement as a Modern Incarnation of Nativism in the United States and Its Role in American Electoral Politics, 2009-2014 by Albert Choi Advisor: Professor Frances Piven The Tea Party movement has been a keyword in American politics since its inception in 2009.
  • Divergent Coverage of the Early Tea Party Movement in The

    Divergent Coverage of the Early Tea Party Movement in The

    DIVERGENT COVERAGE OF THE EARLY TEA PARTY MOVEMENT IN THE WASHINGTON TIMES AND THE NEW YORK TIMES THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of Texas State University-San Marcos In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Master of ARTS Mass Communication By George Hatt, B.A. San Marcos, Texas May 2011 DIVERGENT COVERAGE OF THE EARLY TEA PARTY MOVEMENT IN THE WASHINGTON TIMES AND THE NEW YORK TIMES Committee Members Approved: _____________________________ Dr. Tom Grimes, Chair _____________________________ Dr. Cindy Royal _____________________________ Dr. Bob Price Approved: ____________________________________ Dr. J. Michael Willoughby Dean of the Graduate College COPYRIGHT By George Hatt 2011 DEDICATION For my fiancee Cindy Schiurring. Thanks for being there through the rough times. FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgment. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, George Hatt, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my fiancee, Cindy Schiurring, for sticking with me through a military deployment and more than two years of separation as I worked as an editor at a small-town paper while she pursued her masters degree. She encouraged me to pursue my graduate studies. I would also like to thank Dr.
  • You Didn't Build That Teepee!

    You Didn't Build That Teepee!

    Trump Talks Parenting & Politics The Guns of August at 100 Do Botched Executions Matter? UKIP Triumphs! JEFFREY LORD PETER HITCHENS JESSE WALKER vs. WILLIAM TUCKER JAMES DELINGPOLE JULY/AUGUST 2014 A MONTHLY REVIEW EDITED BY R. EMMETT TYRRELL, JR. You Didn’t Build That Teepee! Elizabeth Warren arouses the worst progressive fantasies. By Ira Stoll PLUS: Summer Books and Cocktails James Taranto, Jonathan Tobin, Freddy Gray, Helen Rittelmeyer, Eve Tushnet, Daniel Foster, Katherine Mangu-Ward…and more! Ukraine: A River Runs Through It Matthew Omolesky Schlesinger’s Excellent Bow Tie R.J. Stove Why I Quit Batman Tim Cavanaugh 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 25 50 75 95 25 50 75 95 25 50 75 95 25 50 75 95 100 100 100 100 “ The best detector is not merely the one that can pick up radar from the farthest distance, although the Valentine One continues to score best.” — Autoweek Now V1 comes to a touchscreen near you. Introducing the Threat Picture You can see the arrows at work on your compatible iPhone® or AndroidTM device. Check it out… The app is free! Yo u can download V1connection, the app Where’s the radar? It’s in the Box. for free. Go to the app store on your device. When installed, the app automatically runs in Demo Mode. No need to link to V1. Analyze preloaded threat situations on three different screens: on the V1 screen, Arrow in the Box means a threat in the radar zone. on Picture, and on List. Then when you’re ready to put the Threat Picture on duty in your car, order the Bluetooth® communication module directly from us.
  • The Weekly Standard…Don’T Settle for Less

    The Weekly Standard…Don’T Settle for Less

    “THE ORACLE OF AMERICAN POLITICS” — Wolf Blitzer, CNN …don’t settle for less. POSITIONING STATEMENT The Weekly Standard…don’t settle for less. Through original reporting and prose known for its boldness and wit, The Weekly Standard and weeklystandard.com serve an audience of more than 3.2 million readers each month. First-rate writers compose timely articles and features on politics and elections, defense and foreign policy, domestic policy and the courts, books, art and culture. Readers whose primary common interests are the political developments of the day value the critical thinking, rigorous thought, challenging ideas and compelling solutions presented in The Weekly Standard print and online. …don’t settle for less. EDITORIAL: CONTENT PROFILE The Weekly Standard: an informed perspective on news and issues. 18% Defense and 24% Foreign Policy Books and Arts 30% Politics and 28% Elections Domestic Policy and the Courts The value to The Weekly Standard reader is the sum of the parts, the interesting mix of content, the variety of topics, type of writers and topics covered. There is such a breadth of content from topical pieces to cultural commentary. Bill Kristol, Editor …don’t settle for less. EDITORIAL: WRITERS Who writes matters: outstanding political writers with a compelling point of view. William Kristol, Editor Supreme Court and the White House for the Star before moving to the Baltimore Sun, where he was the national In 1995, together with Fred Barnes and political correspondent. From 1985 to 1995, he was John Podhoretz, William Kristol founded a senior editor and White House correspondent for The new magazine of politics and culture New Republic.