“On 27 March 2025, President Donald Trump did one of his favorite things: he issued an Executive Order (EO). He is drawn to issue these proclamations because doing so reinforces his sense of ‘self-importance, control and perceived superiority, which, in turn, are features of [his] narcissistic personality.’ … while these past EOs constituted an official blitzkrieg on the present, they lacked that special Orwellian commitment to bending future generations to the will of our present empowered narcissist. However, now we have the 27 March EO. Why is it different? … Entitled, ‘Restoring Truth and sanity to American History’ this EO seeks to assure control of future American perceptions by putting a stop to any reexamination of the nation’s aging batch of ‘justification myths.'” (04/23/25)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“[T]he big reason for the drop in demand for U.S. bonds is an informal, unorganized international boycott of such bonds. Why would any foreigner who lives in a country that has been targeted for damage or destruction by the U.S. government be interested by investing in bonds issued by the U.S. government? … We are seeing this informal-boycott phenomenon with respect to tourism. Foreigners are canceling their vacation plans to the United States, which might well have an adverse impact on U.S. tourism businesses. Moreover, foreigners who own vacation homes in the U.S. are selling them and staying away from our country. Why wouldn’t the same mindset apply to the purchase of U.S. bonds? This is what happens when a government abuses and mistreats people.” (04/23/25)
“‘The curse and scandal of human nature.’ That’s how James Otis, Jr. described arbitrary power. It wasn’t just a sign of tyranny, or a step toward it. It was the very definition of tyranny. It is power without right. And that principle pervades the Declaration of Independence. But this wasn’t a new idea born of the American Revolution. The principle stretches back thousands of years and became the driving force behind written constitutions. The Founders didn’t just fear arbitrary power or fight against it. They defined it. And they warned us: it leads to tyranny, every single time.” (04/23/25)
Source: Property and Environment Research Center
by Brian Yablonski
“As we celebrate Earth Day this April 22 and reflect on how far environmental stewardship has come, we have an opportunity to reimagine conservation to speed up action and get results to meet today’s challenges. When Earth Day first began in 1970, it was in the midst of a remarkable wave of environmental legislation: the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, National Environmental Policy Act and other landmark laws fundamentally changed America’s relationship with its natural resources. … over the decades, these well-intentioned laws have calcified into bureaucratic processes that impede progress due to a fear of reform and misguided belief that only regulation can solve these issues.” (04/23/25)
“As my colleague Bob Kuttner wrote yesterday, Donald Trump, after starting April like a lion, is going out like a lamb. He has said publicly that tariffs on China will ‘come down substantially’, with an unnamed aide floating rollbacks as high as 65 percent. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave a similar story at a closed-door meeting hosted by JPMorganChase (why was he delivering market-moving information in secret to bankers?), and publicly at the Institute of International Finance on Tuesday. ‘There is an opportunity for a big deal here’ with China, Bessent said, and ‘if they want to rebalance [their economy], let’s do it together.’ Wall Street is certainly desperate for any note of conciliation, and Trump saying he has ‘no intention’ of firing Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell made them even more ebullient. But let’s get real.” [editor’s note: First step: Audit the Fed – SAT] (04/24/25)
“The libertarianism of my youth was an open and appealing blend of economic liberalism and social liberalism. Back in the late 60s and early 70s, the movement was united on valuing capitalism, free trade and open borders, and social values like feminism, gay rights, anti-racism, free speech and freedom of the press. Unfortunately a rift developed in the libertarian movement and it is now split into two incompatible and irreconcilable factions. The current split between libertarians who support Donald Trump and those who oppose him is symptomatic of this division. But as bad as this rift is, it threatens to get even worse as I explain in this essay.” (04/23/25)
Source: Niskanen Center
by Cassandra Madison & Gabe Menchaca
“Today, the vast majority of federal hiring actions rely on low-quality applicant self-assessments that do little to differentiate among candidates based on observable merit. This leads to frustration for hiring managers, cycles of repetition for HR professionals, and ultimately, weaker delivery of government programs as new hires don’t arrive fast enough to make a difference. The recently passed bipartisan Chance to Compete Act (CCA) attempts to address this challenge by directing the federal government to prioritize the use of objective assessments in federal hiring to the maximum extent possible. While this is a clear step in the right direction, the CCA left many structural barriers unaddressed: new assessments, developed in the historical way by industrial and organizational psychologists, are extremely resource-intensive to produce. ” (04/23/25)
“TPOL tends to be very hard on so-called ‘legacy’ or mainstream media (MSM). That is, the television and radio networks and their local affiliated TV and radio stations, together with the newspapers (chains or independents and especially the ‘national’ press) and national magazines (Time, Life, Newsweek, and the like, including People and its ilk), and the entertainment industry, including Holywood, New York, and Nashville. Although the power and influence of many of these have waned significantly in recent years, the sad legacy still is with us. Morality, civic integrity, and the love of liberty have all been hugely and negatively impacted by what the MSM has done over more than a century. Not just in the States but in the world.” (04/23/25)
Suppose the U.S. Constitution mandated unilateral free trade with no exceptions. Much could go wrong. A pessimist could fairly ask all of the following: 1. What if other countries take advantage of our unilateralism to drastically raise their tariffs? 2. What if other countries strategically predate on our critical industries, leaving us vulnerable in a major crisis? 3. What if hostile countries buy and stockpile strategic resources from us, then get really hostile? 4. What if some unforeseen trade issue, an ‘unknown unknown,’ arises, and our leaders are unable to respond because the Constitution ties their hands? … When push comes to shove, the defender of unilateral free trade has no response better than, ‘Tough luck.’ Unconvincing, but as I’ve explained before, ‘Tough luck’ is what every conceivable social system tells you in the end …” (04/23/25)
