When $24 billion in foreign sovereign wealth fund money backs a deal to control a third of America's entertainment market, that's not just a business transaction. Allen West makes a compelling case that the proposed Warner Bros. Discovery/Paramount merger is a cultural inflection point we're sleepwalking through. Our stories shape our values, and whoever controls those stories wields real power.
What does “affordability” really mean? Using Abraham Lincoln’s famous warning that the same word can represent both liberty and tyranny, this commentary argues that today’s political push for “affordability” reflects competing visions of economic freedom, and a growing debate over whether government intervention actually makes life more affordable or simply expands control over it.
For 47 years, we've operated in a delusional reality when it comes to Iran. The number one state sponsor of Islamic terrorism has killed and maimed our troops, armed Russia with drones, funded proxy wars across the Middle East, and pursued nuclear weapons not for energy but for apocalyptic ambitions. There is no compromise with a regime that chants "Death to America" and means it. Removing Iran as a threat isn't optional. It's a strategic geopolitical imperative.
When President Trump asked members of Congress during his State of the Union address to stand if they believed the government’s duty is to protect American citizens over illegal aliens, the silence from the left was striking. That moment raises a deeper constitutional question about the true purpose of government. From the Constitution’s Guarantee Clause to the natural rights philosophy of John Locke and the principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the American system is built on the idea that government exists to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens. When elected officials place ideological agendas above the law and refuse to support enforcement of immigration statutes, it raises serious concerns about the rule of law itself—and whether some lawmakers have forgotten the fundamental responsibility they were elected to uphold.
A federal judge just blocked Texas from enforcing key parts of its own DEI law in three school districts. When activist courts override the will of the people, it's time to channel our inner Brigadier General McAuliffe (Battle of the Bulge) and say "Nuts!"
As Texas heads deeper into early voting for the 2026 midterm primary, the question lingers: can Democrats win statewide in the Lone Star State? Despite recent special election wins and shifting poll narratives, the answer remains a firm no. Urban strongholds are not enough to secure statewide success, and key issues like border security, voter ID, energy policy, and parental rights continue to define the political divide. The real challenge for constitutional conservatives is simple: clearly articulate the consequences of leftist policies and make the case to voters across Texas.
Texas is voting to ban Sharia law — and for good reason. When apostasy, simply leaving Islam, is a capital crime in over a dozen countries, there is no compatibility with our First Amendment. Just ask Nissar Hussain, a British Pakistani man condemned to death by a Sharia court for converting to Christianity. His warning to America is one we cannot afford to ignore.
America is a Constitutional Republic, not a pure democracy — and the progressive left's push for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, opposition to the SAVE Act, and efforts to undermine electoral integrity prove they are the real threat to our democratic processes. With Virginia on the verge of becoming the 18th NPVIC state, the stakes for the 2026 midterms couldn't be higher.
The basic purpose of the SAVE Act is to require individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. Now, this sounds just simple, easily comprehensible, and agreeable, right?
During Black History Month, ACRU Executive Director Allen West reflects on being born in a segregated Atlanta hospital in 1961 and uses that personal history to challenge modern claims that voter ID laws resemble Jim Crow. Tracing the arc from Black Codes and segregation to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the political narrative surrounding race and voting rights has been reshaped over time.
