Commentary

Albert Mohler: Which Party Will Be Setting the Agenda in the Senate?

In the wake of the contentious 2020 election, the battle for the majority in the U.S. Senate looms large. That majority will be decided in the two run-off elections in the state of Georgia on January 5th.

Both of the Republicans are incumbents: Kelly Loeffler was appointed by Governor Kemp, replacing Johnny Isakson who had resigned for health reasons.

And David Perdue is running for his second term representing Georgians.

Neither of the candidates reached Georgia’s requirement of 50-percent plus one in the November 3rd election.

All of this matters tremendously:

Holding the majority in the Senate determines who sets the agenda. To put it this way, nothing can come to the Senate floor if the majority leader does not allow it to be presented for a vote.

Turnout is going to be key. It will likely be a very partisan vote, which means that one party or the other is likely to win both seats.

As we understand the issues that will come before the Senate, that matters immensely.

Keep your eyes on Georgia.

Read More »

Jerry Bowyer: Target Aims Left

We all know that a radical minority holds sway in corporate culture today, but retail giant Target has generously shown us just how far this madness has gone.

After a single complaint from a Twitter user, Target removed Abigail Shrier’s book “Irreversible Damage” from its shelves. The book in question was smeared as “transphobic.” It is not. Shrier courageously points out the incredible damage radical transgender ideology can inflict on our children. While Target eventually reversed the ban, it is still a cause for outrage that a corporation of this size is so easily controlled by so few.

Banning books which object to sex changes for children is only possible in an organization beholden to the radical left. Shareholders need to demand viewpoint diversity in our corporations. If conservative shareholders fail to show up at annual meetings, or vote for (or against!) board members, book banning may be the least of our worries.

Read More »

Strachan: Justice Alito’s Warning

Supreme Court Judge Samuel Alito recently made a startling point: “religious liberty is in danger of becoming a second class right.”

Alito said as much to the Federalist Society:

“Just as the COVID restrictions have highlighted the movement toward rule by experts, litigation about those restrictions has pointed up emerging trends in the assessment of individual rights. … It pains me to say this, but in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”

Alito argued that not only religious liberty, but free speech, is imperiled:

“Support for freedom of speech is also in danger. And COVID rules have restricted speech in unprecedented ways.”

This is a timely and prescient warning. Religious liberty is the very foundation of American freedom, and free speech is part of what makes America great.

We cannot sit passively by as our cherished freedoms are whittled away; we must pay attention and take action where we can.

Read More »

Jerry Bowyer: Pollsters and the 2020 Election

Political analyst and poll watcher Nate Silver recently mocked political prediction markets, accusing them of being delusional and out of touch with reality.

But when you look back at the 2020 election, the prediction markets were a better gauge on the outcome than nearly all of the elite polling outlets. While pundits pointed to polls that showed a massive Biden lead, prediction markets thought the election outcome was close to a toss-up.

In Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio, Biden’s support was vastly overstated by the polling industry. In Florida, Polls said Trump would lose. The markets said he would win. He won by over 3 percent.

The success of betting markets is not some great mystery: They harness the power of the profit motive. Pollsters and pundits almost never get fired for bad predictions. But futures markets punish bad predictions.

It’s time we pay less attention to pollsters and more attention to markets.

Read More »

Owen Strachan: Twitter Has an Obligation to Protect Free Speech

It’s now become a normal event on Twitter. President Trump tweets something about election results, and Twitter leadership attaches a disclaimer to it: “This claim about election results is disputed.”

Most everyone is aware that the President has a lively presence on social media. Every citizen in this country is free to evaluate the President’s claims as they see fit. But Twitter should not be moderating the President’s tweets. Doing so is a weakening of free speech.

Twitter is a publicly held company but is still free to set its own rules. That does not mean that they don’t have a responsibility to promote free speech. Like higher education institutions, liberty either flourishes or goes to die in such settings.

Twitter should not act as the President’s self-appointed Big Brother. Twitter should let free speech be free, and leave it to citizens to figure out the rest.

Read More »

Albert Mohler: The ACLU Has Effectively Switched Teams

The ACLU has effectively switched teams, again, on another issue.

Beginning in the late 1960s, the civil rights organization consistently argued for the rights of female athletes in sport, and that meant to compete with other females in sport.

Eventually, Congress passed Title IX legislation in 1972, and that eventually meant an entire structure of women’s sport alongside men’s sport in university intercollegiate athletics.

But the ACLU has now joined the transgender revolution, meaning that it’s now arguing the opposite of what the organization argued on behalf of freedom just back in 1972. The entire Title IX system only makes sense if you know that there is a difference between males and females, and by the way, it’s biological.

Sandra Bucha, a former competitive swimmer who was helped by the ACLU in the courts in the past, explained the results of this turnabout in the Wall Street Journal. She writes, “Women and girls are being displaced by biologically male athletes who have a clear physical advantage. Again,” she writes, “It is the female athlete who’s being denied a spot on the team and the pursuit of her dream, and now is being told to watch from the sidelines.”

As Bucha says, “that’s regression, not progress.”

Read More »