As spring finally and fitfully makes itself known here in God’s country, our author reflects on how the rhythm of language reflects the rhythm of the world. Why do beautiful things haunt us so?

It would be difficult to find a better personification of political imagination in the second half of the 20^th century than President Gerald R. Ford’s ambassador to Great Britain and Secretary of Commerce Elliot Richardson (1920-1999).

Politicians often operate with a different set of values and virtues than other people do, but must they be able to keep promises? Why is promise-keeping so important in political life?

The understandable decision of Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the death penalty in the murder trial of Luigi Mangione, charged with killing 50-year-old health care executive Brian Thompson by shooting him in the back just because Mangione saw Thompson as exemplary of the supposed callous greed of his industry, was perhaps surprisingly met with the news that donations to Mangione’s defense fund have already exceeded $1 million.

Publius often blurred the line between hortatory and argument. Thinking he had slam-dunked the Anti-federalists on the “necessary and proper” and “supremacy” clauses, Publius crowed about how the Constitution satisfied the passions and interests expressed in the Revolution.

Capture of the SS Mayaguez

On May 12, 1975, a military swift boat commanded by the Khmer Rouge captured the U.S. container ship Mayaguez off the Cambodian coast.

In Federalist #44 Madison reviewed Congressional powers and suggested most of them were non-controversial.

The 2014 documentary “The Last Days of Vietnam” puts viewers amid the chaos of the final days of the South Vietnamese government and the fall of Saigon in 1975. News footage of North Vietnam’s assault on Saigon and the heroic response of U.S. military and embassy officials to evacuate South Vietnamese gives a realistic view of Black April, as the South Vietnamese refer to the collapse of their country.

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC, consists of two black granite walls bearing the names of service members who died or remained missing as a result of their service in the war.

Reviewing the Constitutional debates impresses one with the level of argument engaged by both sides. Members of both parties were serious students of history and political theory, demonstrating that a common education doesn’t necessarily produce agreement. What’s most striking about the arguments of that day is how comprehensive, detailed, and thorough they were.

Peter Berger in his classic essay “On the Obsolescence of the Concept of Honor,” demonstrated how societies where honor matters have a thick sociology while those with a thin social sphere are dominated by ideas of human “dignity.”

Many Americans of Generation X and older will recall the red, white, and blue American Freedom Train that was a centerpiece of America’s glorious Bicentennial celebration.

In Federalist #43 Madison continued the themes of the prior essays: an examination of the detailed powers given Congress in Article I, section 8, while also addressing some additional powers.

The most famous photo of the fall of Saigon appears to show a long line of people perched on a ladder atop the US embassy, waiting to be evacuated by a US military helicopter.

If you are dimly aware of a thing called “national politics,” and if you are also dimly aware that a lot of people are getting very red in the face over them, then you might, stifling a yawn, walk over to your bookshelf and pull down a collection of Emerson’s essays.

The commentary on Pope Francis’s passing indicates the extent to which the Catholic Church retains some cultural authority.

Two viruses that define our age and negatively affect our judgements are the tendency to read the past in light of present values and, conversely, to think the problems we face are unique to us.

One of the most compelling, but depressing, World War II films is 1977’s “A Bridge Too Far.”

I offer to the readers of these essays on The Federalist a bit of a breather.

Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 president election outraged Democrats and delighted Republicans.

The founding of the United States is one of the greatest events in world history.

Carl Schmitt, a German writer and thinker who achieved some notoriety after he joined the Nazi party, wrote his most important works in the decade prior to Hitler’s rise to power.

It’s late 1787 and you’re deliberating whether to affirm the plan for the new government.

In 1955, Rudolph Flesch released what ought to have been the definitive book on reading education: Why Johnny Can't Read—And What You Can Do About It.

I’ve argued that essays 37-39 are the hinge on which The Federalist turns.

In recent years some scholars on the Right have begun to emulate those historians of the Left who reject that American Founding as the best source for America’s core principles on liberty and order.

On his last Friday in office, President Biden announced that he had “amended” the Constitution by holding that the Equal Rights Amendment, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, had met the criteria for ratification.

In the past two Reflection essays I’ve pondered the question as to whether American had a founding and, if so, what difference it makes to think so.

In Federalist No. 1, Alexander Hamilton claimed that the Americans had to determine once and for all whether the formation of political institutions could result from reflection and choice or would forever be subject to fate and chance.