Ponnuru on Romney Long on Paul Fund on Haley ON
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
WIIS DC Think Tank Gender Scorecard – DATASET 2018 Index/Appendix: American Enterprise Institute (AEI) Foreign and Defense
• Nonresident Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the WIIS DC Think Tank Gender Scorecard – Middle East: Mona Alami (F) DATASET 2018 Index/Appendix: • Nonresident Senior Fellow, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center: Laura Albornoz Pollmann (F) • Nonresident Senior Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for American Enterprise Institute (AEI) the Middle East: Ali Alfoneh (M) Foreign and Defense Policy Scholars in AEI: • Associate Director for Programs, Rafik Hariri Center • Visiting Scholar: Samuel J. Abrams (M) for the Middle East: Stefanie Hausheer Ali (F) • Wilson H. Taylor Scholar in Health Care and • Nonresident Senior Fellow, Cyber Statecraft Retirement Policy: Joseph Antos (M) Initiative: Dmitri Alperovitch (M) • Resident Scholar and Director of Russian Studies: • Nonresident Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center: Dr. Hussein Leon Aron (M) Amach (M) • Visiting Fellow: John P. Bailey (M) • Nonresident Fellow, Brent Scowcroft Center on • Resident Scholar: Claude Barfield (M) International Security: Dave Anthony (M) • Resident Fellow: Michael Barone (M) • Nonresident Senior Fellow, Global Energy Center: • Visiting Scholar: Robert J. Barro (M) Ragnheiður Elín Árnadóttir (F) • Visiting Scholar: Roger Bate (M) • Visiting Fellow, Brent Scowcroft Center on • Visiting Scholar: Eric J. Belasco (M) International Security/RUSI: Lisa Aronsson (F) • Resident Scholar: Andrew G. Biggs (M) • Executive Vice Chair, Atlantic Council Board of • Visiting Fellow: Edward Blum (M) Directors and International Advisory Board; Chair, • Director of Asian Studies and Resident Fellow: Dan Atlantic Council Business Development and New Blumenthal (M) Ventures Committee; Chairman Emerita, TotalBank • Senior Fellow: Karlyn Bowman (F) (no photo) • Resident Fellow: Alex Brill (M) • Atlantic Council Representative; Director, Atlantic • President; Beth and Ravenel Curry Scholar in Free Council IN TURKEY and Istanbul Summit: Defne Enterprise: Arthur C. -
Contemporary Conservative Constructions of American Exceptionalism
Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, Vol. 1, No.2, 2011, pp. 40-54. Contemporary Conservative Constructions of American Exceptionalism Jason A. Edwards Ever since President Obama took office in 2009, there has been an underlying debate amongst politicians, pundits, and policymakers over America’s exceptionalist nature. American exceptionalism is one of the foundational myths of U.S. identity. While analyses of Barack Obama’s views on American exceptionalism are quite prominent, there has been little discussion of conservative rhetorical constructions of this impor- tant myth. In this essay, I seek to fill this gap by mapping prominent American conservatives’ rhetorical voice on American exceptionalism. Keywords: American exceptionalism, conservative rhetoric, jeremiad In April 2009, President Obama travelled to Europe to meet with European leaders in coordinating a strategy to deal with the global financial crisis and to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the NATO alliance. At a news conference in Strasbourg, France, Ed Luce of the Financial Times asked the president whether or not he believed in American ex- ceptionalism. Obama answered by stating, I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British ex- ceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism. I am enormously proud of my country and its role and history in the world . we have a core set of values that are en- shrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality that, though imperfect, are exceptional. Now, the fact that I am very proud of my country and I think that we‟ve got a whole lot to offer the world does not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of other countries or recogniz- ing that we‟re not always going to be right, or that people may have good ideas, or that in order for us to work collectively, all parties, have to compromise, and that includes us. -
Copyright by Rhiannon Jade Goad 2013
Copyright by Rhiannon Jade Goad 2013 The Thesis Committee for Rhiannon Jade Goad Certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: “Dr. Paul Cured my Apathy”: Ron Paul’s Libertarian Discourse APPROVED BY SUPERVISING COMMITTEE: Supervisor: Susan S Heinzelman Christopher King “Dr. Paul Cured my Apathy”: Ron Paul’s Libertarian Discourse by Rhiannon Jade Goad, B.A. Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Arts and Master of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin August 2013 Abstract “Dr. Paul Cured my Apathy”: Ron Paul’s Libertarian Discourse Rhiannon Jade Goad, M.A.;M.Paff The University of Texas at Austin, 2013 Supervisor: Susan S Heizelman During the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, many young white men found a political hero in the 77-year-old Republican Congressman from Texas, whose rallies often center on obscure, technical arguments concerning the Federal Reserve. It is because of the grassroots support of the young white men who adore him that Ron Paul has become a major figure in today’s political scene. What attracts young white men to Ron Paul? This paper explores the history and discourse of Libertarianism to better understand the political subjectivity and identity of Ron Paul supporters. In Chapter 2, I historically contextualize Paul’s libertarian discourse. I argue that the discourse of libertarianism is characterized by claims to an apolitical, ahistorical past in which Libertarian rhetoric naturalizes discourses of free market capitalism, “classical” liberalism, and “authentic” Americanism. -
Combating Russian Disinformation in Ukraine: Case Studies in a Market for Loyalties
COMBATING RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION IN UKRAINE: CASE STUDIES IN A MARKET FOR LOYALTIES Monroe E. Price* & Adam P. Barry** I. INTRODUCTION This essay takes an oblique approach to the discussion of “fake news.” The approach is oblique geographically because it is not a discourse about fake news that emerges from the more frequently invoked cases centered on the United States and Western Europe, but instead relates primarily to Ukraine. It concerns the geopolitics of propaganda and associated practices of manipulation, heightened persuasion, deception, and the use of available techniques. This essay is also oblique in its approach because it deviates from the largely definitional approach – what is and what is not fake news – to the structural approach. Here, we take a leaf from the work of the (not-so) “new institutionalists,” particularly those who have studied what might be called the sociology of decision-making concerning regulations.1 This essay hypothesizes that studying modes of organizing social policy discourse ultimately can reveal or predict a great deal about the resulting policy outcomes, certainly supplementing a legal or similar analysis. Developing this form of analysis may be particularly important as societies seek to come to grips with the phenomena lumped together under the broad rubric of fake news. The process by which stakeholders assemble to determine a collective position will likely have major consequences for the * Monroe E. Price is an Adjunct Full Professor at the Annenberg School for Communication and the Joseph and Sadie Danciger Professor of Law at Cardozo School of Law. He directs the Stanhope Centre for Communications Policy Research in London, and is the Chair of the Center for Media and Communication Studies of the Central European University in Budapest.” ** Adam P. -
How the Kremlin Weaponizes Information, Culture and Money by Peter Pomerantsev and Michael Weiss
The Menace of Unreality: How the Kremlin Weaponizes Information, Culture and Money by Peter Pomerantsev and Michael Weiss A Special Report presented by The Interpreter, a project of the Institute of Modern Russia imrussia.org interpretermag.com The Institute of Modern Russia (IMR) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy organization—a think tank based in New York. IMR’s mission is to foster democratic and economic development in Russia through research, advocacy, public events, and grant-making. We are committed to strengthening respect for human rights, the rule of law, and civil society in Russia. Our goal is to promote a principles- based approach to US-Russia relations and Russia’s integration into the community of democracies. The Interpreter is a daily online journal dedicated primarily to translating media from the Russian press and blogosphere into English and reporting on events inside Russia and in countries directly impacted by Russia’s foreign policy. Conceived as a kind of “Inopressa in reverse,” The Interpreter aspires to dismantle the language barrier that separates journalists, Russia analysts, policymakers, diplomats and interested laymen in the English-speaking world from the debates, scandals, intrigues and political developments taking place in the Russian Federation. CONTENTS Introductions ...................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ........................................................... 6 Background ........................................................................ -
Liberty Magazine April 2008.Pdf Mime Type
The Films of AynRand April2008 $4.00 ~L.() ~L.() o 00 o I" ....:t- ....:to I"-~ ~ CfJ V"V<-klk.lr.-v and bewilder. 1/ - Thomas Macaulay o ~ II.BEPUBUC 2008: I~Y& Civil Liberties flllt)Begency Reston· Reston, Virginia To order DVDs or CDs of the 2007 talks, go to: www.fff.org/conference2007 2007 Speakers: Ron Paul Andrew P. Napolitano Robert Scheer Daniel Ellsberg Bob Barr Thomas J. Dilorenzo James Bovard Ralph Raico Ivan Eland Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. Justin Raimondo Karen Kwiatkowski Richard M. Ebeling Robert Higgs Doug Sandow Joseph Margulies Sheldon Richman Joseph R. Stromberg Anthony Gregory Joanne Mariner lau rence M. Vance Ted Galen Carpenter Bart Frazier Jacob G. Hornberger 11350- Random Hills Road Suite 800 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Phone: (703) 934-6101 Fax: (703) 352-8678 Email: [email protected] April 2008 Inside Liberty Volume 22, Number 3 4 Letters Good point, but ... 7 Reflections We push junk bonds, confiscate junk food, christen a new sex organ, empower welfare recipients, give the candidates what they really want, study a society of almost-sentient upright bipeds, expose the most corrupt corporation, and search for WMD's. 19 Have Cat, Shot Cat Stephen Cox shows what happens when tigers attack. Features 21 PFY vs. RP: Is There a Racist in the House? Ron Paul, the libertarian in the presidential race, was the subject of a political scandal. Bruce Ramsey assesses the damage. 25 The Films of Ayn Rand How does an individualist handle an art form in which collaboration is essential? Stephen Cox examines the movie career of Ayn Rand. -
American Federalism: More Than Two Centuries of Political Tension
CHAPTER ONE American Federalism: More Than Two Centuries of Political Tension efore one explores the components and particulars of the BConnecticut polity, it is important to first discuss the features of American federalism, as well as the ongoing tension between federal and state authority throughout the course of American history. This general overview should demonstrate the centrality of state governments within the context of the American federal system, and why this work has special relevance in the twenty-first century. One of the bedrock principles of the United States Constitution is that the power of government should be limited and restrained. Heavily influenced by the writings of classical liberal philosophers, most notably the English philosopher John Locke (1632-1704), the Founding Fathers devised an ingenious constitutional system in which power would never be concentrated in one branch or one level of government.1 Limited government was viewed as a prerequisite to individual liberty and more generally the preservation of the newly- formed republic. The Founding Fathers’ deep belief in a system of limited government is clearly reflected in the principle known as federalism. Drafted during a swelteringly hot summer in Philadelphia more than two hundred years ago, the Constitution of the United States established a governing system in which power would be divided between two levels of government, national and state. The principle of federalism is among the several distinguishing features of the American constitutional framework. 2 AMERICAN FEDERALISM Federalism and Divided Power The Constitution, written in response to the failure of the Articles of Confederation (1781-88), provides the national govern- ment with both enumerated and implied powers. -
Neoconservatism: Origins and Evolution, 1945 – 1980
Neoconservatism: Origins and Evolution, 1945 – 1980 Robert L. Richardson, Jr. A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2009 Approved by, Michael H. Hunt, Chair Richard Kohn Timothy McKeown Nancy Mitchell Roger Lotchin Abstract Robert L. Richardson, Jr. Neoconservatism: Origins and Evolution, 1945 – 1985 (Under the direction of Michael H. Hunt) This dissertation examines the origins and evolution of neoconservatism as a philosophical and political movement in America from 1945 to 1980. I maintain that as the exigencies and anxieties of the Cold War fostered new intellectual and professional connections between academia, government and business, three disparate intellectual currents were brought into contact: the German philosophical tradition of anti-modernism, the strategic-analytical tradition associated with the RAND Corporation, and the early Cold War anti-Communist tradition identified with figures such as Reinhold Niebuhr. Driven by similar aims and concerns, these three intellectual currents eventually coalesced into neoconservatism. As a political movement, neoconservatism sought, from the 1950s on, to re-orient American policy away from containment and coexistence and toward confrontation and rollback through activism in academia, bureaucratic and electoral politics. Although the neoconservatives were only partially successful in promoting their transformative project, their accomplishments are historically significant. More specifically, they managed to interject their views and ideas into American political and strategic thought, discredit détente and arms control, and shift U.S. foreign policy toward a more confrontational stance vis-à-vis the Soviet Union. -
Newsbusters • 2007
MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER 2007 ANNUAL REPORT 20 YEARS OF EXCELLENCE CONTENTS A Message from L. Brent Bozell III 1 News Analysis Division 2 Business & Media Institute 4 Culture and Media Institute 6 TimesWatch 8 CNSNews.com 9 Farewell to David Thibault 11 MRCAction.org 12 FightMediaBias.org 12 NewsBusters.org 13 Youth Education & Internship Program 14 MRC’s Web sites 15 Publications 16 Whitewash 17 Impact: TV, Radio, Print & Web 18 MRC Through the Years Intro: 20 1987-1988 22 1989-1990 23 1991-1992 24 1993-1994 25 1995-1996 26 1997-1998 27 1999-2000 28 2001-2002 29 2003-2004 30 2005-2006 31 The MRC’s 20th Anniversary Gala 32 MRC Galas Through the Years 34 MRC Leadership and Board of Trustees 36 MRC Associates 37 Honor Roll of Major Benefactors 40 Inside the MRC 2007 41 2007 Financial Report 42 Letter to L. Brent Bozell III from William F. Buckley Jr. 44 ABOUT THE COVER: At the MRC’s 20th Anniversary Gala, Herman Cain, Chairman of the MRC’s Business & Media Institute, and MRC Board of Trustees Chairman Dick Eckburg surprised Brent Bozell with this painting they commissioned by renowned artist Steve Penley. Penley is best known for his bold and vibrant paintings of historical and popular icons, including Ronald Reagan, George Washington and Winston Churchill. The massive 7’ x 9’ painting now hangs outside Mr. Bozell’s offi ce suite at the MRC’s headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. A Message from L. Brent Bozell III In 2007, the liberal media proved, once again, that they are the most powerful arm of the Left. -
Apush Review Packet
APUSH REVIEW PACKET The Exam: • The exam is 3 hours and 5 minutes in length and consists of two sections. In section I, students answer 80 multiple choice questions in 55 minutes. In section II, students are given 15 minutes to plan and 45 minutes to write an essay on the document-based question (DBQ), and 70 minutes to answer two essay questions. Suggested time to be spent on each of the essay questions is 5 minutes planning and 30 minutes writing. Scoring: • The DBQ & two FRE are scored on a scale of 1-9 – Basis of a thesis, argument, and supporting evidence (including documents for DBQ) • The M/C counts for 50%, the Essays 50% – DBQ counts for 22.5%, FRE 27.5% ea. • 180 possible points – [# correct] x 1.125 = _________ MC – # out of 9 x 4.50 = ________ DBQ – # out of 9 x 2.750 = _______ FRE 1 – # out of 9 x 2.750 = _______ FRE 2 DBQ: • Requires you to answer by using documentary evidence AND your outside knowledge • READ QUESTION • BRAINSTORM!! • READ DOCUMENTS – Not statements of FACTS; descriptions, interpretations or opinions; READ THE SOURCE! • WRITE YOUR ESSAY Writing an Essay: • Thesis Paragraph – Addresses the QUESTION!! – Contains Thesis (what is YOUR theme) – Organizational Categories (set up your following paragraphs) • Supporting Paragraphs – Topic sentence – Specific factual information – Interpretive commentary – Documentation (DBQ)* – Clincher sentence • Conclusion – Supports, sums up Level of Questions Level One: questions are the facts of history. They can be answered from the text or other resources Level Two: questions require students to make inferences as to how and why the factual information has an impact in the historical context in which it occurs. -
APUSH Unit 3: Revolution and Republican Culture, 1754-1800 (Chapters 4-7)
APUSH Unit 3: Revolution and Republican Culture, 1754-1800 (chapters 4-7) Key Theme: British imperial attempts to reassert control over its colonies and the colonial reaction to these attempts produced a new American republic, along with struggles over the new nation’s social, political, and economic identity. Key Concepts 3.1 — British attempts to assert tighter control over its North American colonies and the colonial resolve to pursue self-government led to a colonial independence movement and the Revolutionary War. I. The competition among the British, French, and American Indians for economic and political advantage in North America culminated in the Seven Years’ War (the French and Indian War), in which Britain defeated France and allied American Indians. II. The desire of many colonists to assert ideals of self-government in the face of renewed British imperial efforts led to a colonial independence movement and war with Britain. 3.2 — The American Revolution’s democratic and republican ideals inspired new experiments with different forms of government. I. The ideals that inspired the revolutionary cause reflected new beliefs about politics, religion, and society that had been developing over the course of the 18th century. II. After declaring independence, American political leaders created new constitutions and declarations of rights that articulated the role of the state and federal governments while protecting individual liberties and limiting both centralized power and excessive popular influence. III. New forms of national culture and political institutions developed in the United States alongside continued regional variations and differences over economic, political, social, and foreign policy issues. 3.3 — Migration within North America and competition over resources, boundaries, and trade intensified conflicts among peoples and nations. -
The Power of Modern Partisanship
The Power of Modern Partisanship The Aligning of Social and Political Identity and Its Effects An Our Age of Uncertainty paper by Chris Jackson Ipsos Presents Age of Uncertainty The Power of Modern Partisanship The Power of Modern Partisanship The Aligning of Social and Political Identity and Its Effects Politicians, pollsters, and social scientists all seek to understand and predict how people will respond to events. To this end, we have found that identity—or, more precisely, how people define themselves—is a powerful predictor of behavior. This is an outgrowth of using demographics in social sciences as proxies for a wider range of socio-cultural beliefs. Since people have many different ways of characterizing themselves in different circumstances, contexts, or times, researchers have traditionally relied on context-specific identifiers. For instance, someone may behave like a parent at home but an employee at work. However, one particular type of identity—political partisanship—has become the lens for many Americans in how they relate to the world around them. This has problematic implications, not just for government, but for civil society and the economy, as party identification has an increasingly zero-sum logic of “with us or against us.” Political partisanship is not a new phenomenon. It has When people hear of “increased partisanship,” as they often existed since the establishment of the American Republic do today, they may think that an ever-larger proportion of when Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party Americans are closely identifying with either of the two faced off against Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Party.