Source: Independent Institute
by Ivan Eland
“The average voter, from personal experience or attempted avoidance thereof, is probably aware that excessive debt is bad, but he or she may be less clear about its deleterious national economic consequences. Even less obvious are the national security ramifications.” (08/25/26)
Source: Liberal Currents
by Nicholas Grossman
“The president’s choices at home and abroad are boosting Democrats’ chances in November.” (08/26/26)
Source: Los Angeles Times
by Erwin Chemerinsky
“The Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday allowing President Trump’s executive order on mail voting to go forward is stunningly insensitive to the context: Trump is trying to exercise control over elections when he has absolutely no authority to do so. In one sense, the justices decided nothing, simply saying it was too soon for federal courts to get involved. But in a more important way, the court could have and should have put an emphatic end to the president’s efforts to try to regulate voting operations that are legally the domain of state governments.” (08/25/26)
Source: The Dispatch
by Jonah Goldberg
“Not all concerns about data centers are so crazy or even unreasonable. They do use a lot of water, though not nearly as much as some claim. They can cause electricity rates to go up. They’re ugly. And, if you’re freaking out about what AI will do to your job or to American society, taking it out on data centers makes a certain amount of sense. Politicians, as a class, tend to indulge moral panics. Which is why it’s no surprise that Republicans and Democrats alike are racing to get on the ‘right’ side of the issue.” (08/26/26)
https://thedispatch.com/article/data-centers-artificial-intelligence-moral-panic/
Source: Show-Me Institute
by Avery Frank
“A few weeks ago, the City of St. Louis issued a proposal that would require new data center developments to use renewable energy for their operations, among many other requirements. There is now a conditional waiver process to sidestep the renewable requirement if the developer can prove they and Ameren can’t meet it, which is a slight improvement. From a free-market perspective, the flaws of the proposal are clear. The city would be selecting certain types of energy (in this case solar and wind) in the name of ‘clean air’ while excluding from consideration not only energy from coal and natural gas, but even nuclear energy, which also has zero emissions.” (08/25/26)
https://showmeinstitute.org/article/energy/government-intervention-in-the-energy-market/
Source: The American Prospect
by Eleanor Davis-Diver
“‘In casinos, the house always wins. With Kalshi, there is no house. We don’t win when our customers lose,’ the nation’s leading prediction market states on its FAQ page, differentiating itself from traditional sports betting. According to its proponents, prediction markets operate on a ‘peer-to-peer’ structure where, instead of a house, the ‘counterparty’ on a bet is another regular person, just like you or me. ‘Unlike sportsbooks Kalshi doesn’t set the odds, other users do’, claims an ad spot currently playing across television and digital platforms, featuring the world’s longest sandwich. These other ‘users’ are known as market makers, a common feature of financial markets, who continuously quote prices for everyone else to ensure consistent liquidity and smooth trading. But contrary to what the advertisement implies, most market makers are not ordinary people but highly advanced trading institutions.” (08/26/26)
https://prospect.org/2026/08/26/house-always-wins-kalshi-prediction-markets/
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Isabelle Brito
“Parents and community members have every right to criticize what their schools make available and ask officials to reconsider particular books. That’s free speech, too. The problem arises when one individual or group’s political views determine which ideas students can explore in their school library. Massachusetts’ Freedom to Read Law offers a promising solution, one that FIRE has long called for: due process for books. That means fair and clear procedures for reviewing challenged library materials.” (08/25/26)
https://www.fire.org/news/massachusetts-has-better-approach-book-challenges-due-process
Source: Libertarian Institute
by Patrick Carroll
“A considerable portion of libertarian infighting seems to stem from the largely unrecognized fact that there are two different ways to interpret the non-aggression principle (NAP). On the surface, the NAP seems clear: aggression is wrong. But there is a deontological way to interpret this and a consequentialist way, and these interpretations are mutually exclusive. Deontological reasoning argues people should refrain from acts of aggression, even if that leads to a less free society. Consequentialist reasoning argues people should act to create as free a society as possible, even if that means using aggression.” (08/25/26)
Source: Reason
by Eric Boehm
“As a governor and senator, Huey Long is best remembered for his radical proposals to redistribute wealth by force and for criticizing President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ as not expansive or progressive enough. So when Vice President J.D. Vance says out loud that he finds Long ‘great’ and ‘interesting,’ that’s worth keeping in mind. While speaking in Ohio last week, Vance invoked Long’s famous ‘Every Man A King’ slogan and hailed Long as a ‘great Southern populist’ who was ‘an interesting guy; kind of a crazy guy.’ … The moment is illustrative both because of Vance’s choice to invoke Long by name—this was a deliberate choice made in a prewritten speech, not some off-the-cuff remark—and for how the vice president seems to have misunderstood the speech he was referencing.” (08/25/26)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“The U.S. military has just announced that it has carried out two more murders on the high seas near South America. This now brings the military’s high-seas murders to more than 200 people. Mind you, in its announcement, the military did not use the term ‘murder.’ The announcement stated that the military is simply enforcing the U.S. drug war. But make no mistake about it: What the military is doing is engaging in state-sponsored murder, which is ordinarily a felony offense. … Under America’s criminal-justice system, the police are not permitted to kill people they suspect of violating federal drug laws. They are required to instead take them into custody, indict them, and prosecute them. The U.S military does none of these things. It just murders the people it suspects, based on top-secret information, of violating federal drug laws.” (08/25/26)
https://www.fff.org/2026/08/25/more-military-murders-on-the-high-seas/