ACRU Senior Fellow Ken Blackwell will be talking to Jan Mickelson on 1040 AM WHO out of Des Moines, IA on Wednesday, October 1, 2008 at 10:07am. He will be talking about his recent National Review Online column about ACORN. Tune in if you are in the Des Moines area of you can listen live on the internet.
As negotiations over Congress's emergency rescue bill continued over the weekend, repeated rumors leaked out that the Democrats were trying to funnel money to a hyper-partisan organization involved in criminal voter fraud. I'm speaking of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now -- known by its acronym, ACORN. Although ACORN was cut from the final legislation, it's important to understand this organization and its long history with, of all people, Barack Obama. And it's important to see how partisan this emergency legislation has become.
This column originally appeared on Townhall.com on September 27, 2008.
A respectful and prolonged discussion between atheists and believers about truth and faith is the focus of a brilliant new book by noted author and theologian Michael Novak.
I first got to know Ambassador Novak through my work at the United Nations, as we both served as U.S. Representative to the Human Rights Commission. He is a leading Catholic theologian and Templeton Prize laureate who currently serves as a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His latest book, No One Sees God: The Dark Night of Atheists and Believers, is both personal and very […]
On September 16, 2008, the American Civil Rights Union filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court urging the Court to take on appeal the case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission. This case involves a feature length, documentary film produced by Citizens United named Hillary: The Movie. Because the movie was about a candidate for President, the Federal Elections Commission ruled that it was subject to federal campaign finance laws. Consequently, the movie was prohibited from screening or broadcast during the 2008 election season while Hillary Clinton was still a candidate. The ACRU argued in its brief that this was a gross […]
The key to understanding the Presidential election this year is that the two candidates are diametrically opposed on almost every major issue. In probably no other election since the Civil War have the differences between the two candidates been so stark.
Last week saw three human rights episodes play out in Russia, China and the United States. These events show us how America stacks up against the rest of the world. This past week the world saw the resurgent danger of the old Soviet Union in the modern Russian Federation. Russian military forces invaded the sovereign neighboring nation of Georgia. Although Russia claims to be aiding people in the disputed Georgian province of South Ossetia, the reality is that covert Russian agents have been fomenting upheaval, and Russia had been moving forces into place for this invasion.
It behooves us all, especially in this pivotal election year, to reflect on the words of our nations Founders in light of medical sciences capacity to infringe upon the first human right, the right to life.
At this week's G8 Summit, the cost of gasoline is one of the main topics of discussion. With the price of crude oil hovering around $136 a barrel, the industrialized world is looking for answers. But none seem to exist right now.
On January 9, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments for one of the biggest election law cases in years. This case might decide who becomes president of America, and shape the future of the country.
"Presidential claims of a right to preserve the confidentiality of information and documents in the face of legislative demands have figured prominently, though intermittently, in executive-congressional relations since at least 1792. Few such interbranch disputes over access to information have reached the courts for substantive resolution, the vast majority achieving resolution through political negotiation and accommodation. In fact, it was not until the Watergate-related lawsuits in the 1970's seeking access to President Nixon's tapes that the existence of a presidential confidentiality Authority was judicially established as a necessary derivative of the President's status in our constitutional scheme of separated powers.
