In his 2006 book, In Our Hands, Charles Murray proposed overarching changes in the governmental system, which he conveniently titled “The Plan.”
When international test scores came out showing that American students scored lower on standardized math tests than Koreans but felt better about themselves, statisticians scratched their heads. It turns out that the Yanks may actually have been living up to what they were trained for.
Parents continue to voice their alarm over the manner in which California public schools teach seventh-graders about Islam compared to other faiths.
We have written about film studies and English professors who come up with novel theories about cinematic masterpieces without bothering to check the archived papers of the directors, writers and producers of those films to see if their hypotheses were the filmmakers’ original intentions.
Stephen Meyer’s book, Signature in the Cell does not attempt to unravel the age-old mystery of the origin of life.
Ever wonder what Constitutional law will look like in 2020? While President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court raises the question of just how much judicial activism the administration intends to foster, writings from some of his nominees also demonstrate how the President prefers progressive jurisprudence.
As the debate on healthcare reform heats up in Congress, many pundits from both sides are barraging the American people with seemingly contradictory statistics and evidence.
In the face of legislation to create a public option in health care, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) recently convened a panel of experts to discuss the prospects of reforming the existing institution of Medicaid—a proposition which economists Thomas Granneman and Mark Pauly aim to defend in their newly released book “Reform Medicaid First: Laying the Foundation for National Health Care Reform.”
Abigail Thernstrom makes the argument that, in the aftermath of the election of Barack Obama, the Voting Rights Act has actually begun hampering and damaging the very racial group it was originally intended to protect.
Supporters of government-run medical care frequently point to the “affordability” of this type of system, but such terms are inherently misleading.