In a recent column, The Washington Post’s Fact Checker declared Rep. Ron Paul votes against “virtually every piece of legislation that could be interpreted as government overreach or interference with the free market.” There one small problem with the analysis: It ignores the fact that Paul is one of the biggest pork-barrel earmarkers on Capitol Hill. 

It is ridiculous to call the theory of the Fed under Alan Greenspan "libertarian."

With the Supreme Court taking up Arizona’s “show me your papers” immigration law, we’re once again thrust into a useful debate over the role of the government and the obligations of the citizen — and non-citizen. Rather than come at it from the usual angle, I thought I’d try something...

Roger Scruton discusses why the environmental movement fits well under the umbrella of conservatism through his new book,  How to Think Seriously About the Planet.

So now it's Ron Paul's turn. The diminutive Texas libertarian is poised in the latest polls to win the Iowa caucuses. Obviously, this would be rough news for Newt Gingrich — who's in third place and falling — and very good news for Mitt Romney.

Rep. Ron Paul is in a dead heat with Mitt Romney for first place in the Iowa caucuses. If he does pull out a win on Tuesday, Iowa Republicans will have chosen as their commander in chief a man who says it was wrong to kill Osama bin Laden.

When Vladimir Putin returns to the Russian presidency on Monday, May 7, the pageantry surrounding his inauguration will aim to portray a picture of unassailable strength, a confident master of his domain invulnerable to pressures from within or without. But things are not quite as stable...

Poverty rates should go down. But does that mean it's the government's responsibility? Maybe the answer is yes. But if it is, the burden of proof should fall on those who, in effect, want the government to win the future by "investing" in shoes--rather than on those of us who are open to the idea of turning back the clock.