Voters reward politicians who make their lives better, even in small ways.  Keeping your shoes on in the TSA line, a few hundred extra dollars in your federal tax refund, unnatural dyes removed from your kids’ cereal—Americans will remember these little improvements when they head to the polls in November. With the war in Iran dominating news coverage, President Donald Trump needs his entire administration laser focused on delivering as many of these micro wins as possible. Unfortunately, in its first major antitrust action after the departure of Gail Slater—the tough-on-monopoly head of the Antitrust Division—Justice Department lawyers appear to have retreated to the same weak settlement approach that frustrated conservatives for years. The DOJ’s bipartisan lawsuit against Live Nation (also Ticketmaster’s owner), which 39 states and the District of Columbia signed onto, was a golden opportunity. Everybody hates inflated ticket prices and the ridiculous junk fees that accompany them, but we’re stuck paying them because Live Nation is pretty much the only game in town.  The company controls 64% of the country’s highest-grossing amphitheaters and 78% of the most lucrative arenas. Its biggest competitors operate 5% and 9%, respectively. It also provides the lion’s share of promotion and ticketing services for shows at these top venues, domineering an eye-popping 80% of the primary ticketing marketplace. Big isn’t automatically bad, but Live Nation abuses this vertically integrated monopoly to harm artists, competitors, and customers. Artists get locked out of Live Nation venues if they opt for rival promoters or ticketers (an illegal practice known as “tying”). Those competitors—who might have offered better deals—get forced out of the market. Concertgoers, with no other options in sight, bite the bullet and pay whatever Live Nation demands. If DOJ’s lawyers had stayed the course, they could have lowered prices and introduced real competition into the live entertainment industry by forcing Live Nation to sell off Ticketmaster. Instead, they offered the company a slap-on-the-wrist settlement this week, just one week after the trial began. Yes, the settlement requires Live Nation to pay a stated $280 million, but according to some estimates, that’s just four days’ worth of revenue for the company—a drop in the bucket. It mandates that Live Nation get rid of the exclusive booking arrangements it has at 13 venues, but it doesn’t force the company to divest a single one of the venues it owns.  This agreement looks like the bare minimum DOJ lawyers could demand while still claiming victory. It won’t deliver anything close to the relief consumers could have expected if DOJ had argued and won its case. That’s why so many Republican attorneys generals have expressed their distaste, announcing that they will continue the litigation on their end. They are even pushing for a mistrial. North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson went so far as to call it “a terrible deal that USDOJ hid from the states until the last minute.” Settling would have made sense if the government’s lawyers had thought they’d lose at trial, but they had no reason to think that would happen. The judge overseeing the case had already shot down Live Nation’s motions for dismissal and summary judgment and seemed highly skeptical of the company’s arguments. This is not the kind of antitrust enforcement conservatives expected after President Trump promised a tougher stance on monopolies that hurt working Americans. DOJ antitrust czar Gail Slater promised to usher in a new, more aggressive approach for the age of working-class conservatism. Instead, she was forced out last month, and DOJ immediately returned to its usual practice of deferring to Big Business.  Multiple states are still pursuing lawsuits against Live Nation, as is Trump’s Federal Trade Commission under Chairman Andrew Ferguson. But by squandering its opportunity to remove a source of annoyance that plagues millions of Americans every year, Trump’s DOJ has made this fight tougher. The president should intercede and ensure that his Justice Department doesn’t close the book on this case so soon. Trump promised to stand up to monopolies that hurt working Americans. His DOJ must make sure that promise includes Live Nation. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post State AGs Are Right: DOJ Must Fix Its Ticketmaster Settlement  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

What makes a man truly great? As President Donald Trump celebrates the ouster of dictators in Iran and Venezuela, and jokes about running for a third term in 2028, I can’t help but think of the two great men whose lives pivoted on one date—the Ides of March. “The Ides of March” has a powerful, ominous, almost alien feel, but it’s just a fancy Latin term for March 15, the day in 44 B.C. when members of the Roman Senate stabbed Julius Caesar, who had just been appointed dictator for life. Today, “dictator” means a person with near absolute power, and it’s often synonymous with “tyrant.” The ancient Roman Republic, however, established it as an actual position—a person invested with supreme authority during severe crises, but only for a maximum of six months. The most famous example, Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, took up the mantle in the 400s B.C., assuming absolute power to resolve a crisis but then immediately returning to his farm after saving Rome. Caesar had achieved great successes for Rome, but accepting this title threatened to make him something Rome had intentionally rejected for centuries—a monarch. In one of history’s greatest ironies, the senators killed Caesar to restore the Roman Republic, but they ended up bringing about its ultimate demise, as a bloody civil war saw the emergence of the first emperor, Caesar’s nephew Augustus. Redeeming the Ides of March Another Ides of March brought about a similarly ironic fate in 1783. George Washington led the Continental Army in the Revolutionary War, and while the British had already surrendered at Yorktown in 1781, they had yet to sign the Treaty of Paris acknowledging America’s independence in September 1783. The army, camped near Newburgh, New York, and still active because America was still at war, harbored grievances against the Continental Congress, because Congress hadn’t paid them. An anonymous soldier circulated two inflammatory letters, suggesting the Army do more than just ask nicely for more money. The first letter urged Army leaders to “suspect the man who would advise to more moderation and longer forbearance.” The second suggested that Washington supported an aggressive plan to move against Congress. It seemed the Continental Army might take up arms against America’s fledgling government. Some analysts have suggested the Army might have tried to make Washington a king. Whatever the true goals of this Newburgh Conspiracy, Washington took a firm stance against it. “This dreadful alternative, of either deserting our country in the extremest hour of her distress, or turning our Army against it … has something so shocking in it, that humanity revolts at the idea,” Washington wrote in his manuscript of the address. Any man suggesting it must be “an insidious foe” against the Army and his country, the commander-in-chief said. He urged the Army to trust Congress, and not to “tarnish the reputation of an Army which is celebrated through all Europe for its fortitude and patriotism.” Captain Samuel Shaw recalled that Washington read a letter from Congress, expressing admiration for the Army. While reading, Washington “made a short pause, took out his spectacles, and begged the indulgence of his audience while he put them on, observing at the same time that he had grown gray in their service, and now found himself growing blind.” Shaw noted that this remark “forced its way to the heart, and you might see sensibility moisten every eye.” Washington had talked the Army off a cliff and had seemingly rejected the possibility of becoming a military dictator. While Washington admirably led men in battle—and, what may be even more difficult, in occasionally ignominious retreat—and later shepherded the fledgling republic through its tumultuous early years under the new Constitution, he consistently rejected long-term power. Lewis Nicola, writing to Washington in May 1782, expressed what he claimed were sentiments shared by the Army, that the commander-in-chief may want to consider taking charge of the American government as something like a king. Washington responded that “no occurrence in the course of the war has given me more painful sensations than your information of there being such ideas existing in the Army.” He added that, “if I am not deceived in the knowledge of myself, you could not have found a person to whom your schemes are more disagreeable.” The American Cincinnatus When Washington resigned his military commission in December 1783 following the Treaty of Paris, King George III reportedly responded to the news by saying, “If he did, he would be the greatest man in the world.” Washington did not step aside from public life. He presided over the Constitutional Convention and served as America’s first president, holding together in one government two fiercely competing factions: the Federalists (led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams) and Republicans (led by Thomas Jefferson). Yet Washington also established a key precedent by stepping aside from the presidency after two terms—a precedent only one president, whose name is rightly synonymous with government overreach, ever dared to defy. The Ides of March revealed George Washington’s true character—establishing him as the American Cincinnatus. Washington’s noble speech prevented America’s experiment in ordered liberty from being smothered in the cradle. As Trump topples modern-day dictators and defends our mighty experiment in liberty, he should also heed Washington’s example. The true measure of a man’s greatness isn’t just what he achieves with power, but his ability to give up power for a more noble cause. The post Beware the Ides of March: What Julius Caesar and George Washington Teach Amid Today’s Toppling of Dictators appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Former President Barack Obama long ago surpassed the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton as America’s most influential race hustler. The country got a reminder when Obama spoke at Jackson’s funeral, even though Jackson’s son urged the speakers “not to bring their politics” to the service. Obama said: “Every day you wake up to things you just didn’t think were possible. Each day, we’re told by those in high office to fear each other, and to turn on each other. And that some Americans count more than others.” Same old Obama. In his 2004 Democratic National Convention speech, he famously declared, “There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America—there’s the United States of America.” It was the line that launched him and made millions across party lines believe he could bridge divides. Obama won the presidency with just over 52% of the popular vote, but he entered the Oval Office in January 2009 with a nearly 70% approval rating. Polls in late 2008 and early 2009 showed both Black and white Americans believed race relations would improve under his leadership. By the time he left office in 2017, polls showed majorities or pluralities of both Blacks and whites thought race relations had gotten worse. In Obama’s eight years as president, he repeatedly whipped out the race card, injecting racial division into matters large and small while maintaining the image of a racial unifier who would heal America’s deepest wounds. In 2009, at the beginning of his presidency, he declared that the Cambridge police “acted stupidly” in arresting Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. Obama turned a cop-just-doing-his-job encounter with the belligerent Gates into a national “teachable moment” about alleged racial profiling by cops against blacks. In 2012, about a young black man shot and killed by a self-described neighborhood Florida watchman, Obama said, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” A jury found the man who shot Trayvon Martin not guilty, and jurors who spoke publicly said race had nothing to do with the encounter. In a 2014 speech before the United Nations, Obama invoked the case of Ferguson, Missouri, to enlighten the world about America’s supposed deep-seated problems with race relations. Later, the “hands up, don’t shoot” narrative about Michael Brown’s death turned out to be a complete lie, and the officer was exonerated. Obama embraced Black Lives Matter’s police-are-out-to-get-blacks rhetoric, despite evidence that, if anything, cops are more hesitant to pull the trigger on a black suspect than a white one. In 2015, he proclaimed racism is in America’s “DNA.” Although the media for the most part fawned over Obama, first lady Michelle Obama insisted her husband suffered from unfair media coverage because of racism. Obama invited fellow race hustler Sharpton to the White House over 70 times, more than any other “civil rights” figure. And, for good measure, Obama even argued that “a theoretical case” could be made for slavery reparations to be paid by non-slave owners and to non-slaves. From the beginning of his presidency until its end, Obama stoked resentment, divided Americans by skin color, and kept the race grievance industry alive and well-oiled. The man Americans hired to unite us became the victicrat-in-chief, a title his Jackson eulogy shows he retains. Trump-hating media still gives Obama a pass that no Republican could ever dream of receiving. Imagine a Republican president doing even half of what Obama did: routinely injecting race into controversies, cozying up to a white Sharpton-like figure, and wrapping his arms around a toxic “movement” called White Lives Matter. The outrage would be endless, the headlines relentless—and rightfully so. Obama’s real legacy on race? Blacks are eternal victims—distressed, oppressed, and suppressed by “The Man”—and trapped in a system rigged against them from birth to death. His own extraordinary rise, of course, contradicts this counterproductive message. Yet he persists in selling it to willing buyers. Obama is still relatively young. So, he has decades ahead to remain a loud voice in the public square—and he possesses a warehouse full of race cards ready to be played. What a waste. COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Obama’s Race-Hustling Eulogy at a Race Hustler’s Funeral appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It has been nearly three decades since her tragic death, yet Carolyn Bessette Kennedy has re-emerged as the new, and unexpected, conservative style it-girl. Despite the Democrat dynasty she married into, her influence on culture and conservative fashion is taking over. In the internet sensation FX limited series on Hulu, “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette,” Ryan Murphy introduces a younger generation to the iconic couple and their even more iconic style. The show has taken over social media, sparking conversations about conservative fashion, even prompting some to organize pop-up JFK Jr. lookalike contests in Washington, D.C. and New York City.   The show perfectly captures Bessette’s classic 90’s, minimalist conservative look: black cigarette trousers, knee-length skirts and dresses, perfectly tailored Levi 571’s, long black coats, high-neck tops, and white crisp button-downs. She wore slingback heels, loafers, black boots, and sometimes a tortoiseshell headband. This isn’t anything new for conservatives on Capitol Hill, this is the everyday uniform. Sleek, minimalistic, neutral, classic, and—unironically—conservative.   SHANE WATSON: As a new TV series launches on the doomed romance of JFK Jnr and Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy… why no one can truly capture the effortless chic of America's tragic style icon https://t.co/Qxcfls4h6D— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) February 17, 2026 Thanks to Bessette, dressing like a conservative is the newest trend. “Everyone is trying to copy her outfits after seeing Love Story,” Liz Teich, a New York-based stylist, told The Guardian. The stylist, with over 500,000 followers on Instagram and millions of views on TikTok, started showing her followers how to build a capsule wardrobe following “CBK’s Style.”   Regardless of political affiliation, young women are now flocking to Loft to buy Bessette’s much worn roll-neck sweater, ditching the crop-tops and short skirts for more appropriate styles, begging Zara to return to what they once were—the go to place for basics—and even traveling to New York just to go to C.O. Bigelow, where you can get the same sleek headband Bessette often wore.   Vogue Magazine even created a blueprint for readers to buy look-a-likes for some of her iconic photographed outfits.   ‘Love Story’ proves Carolyn Bessette Kennedy is still the ultimate style icon https://t.co/VRDggNsyCY pic.twitter.com/oNjk8aMVNQ— Page Six (@PageSix) February 13, 2026 Her look fit her role at Calvin Klein where she started as a sales rep and worked her way up to the production director, a role where she heavily influenced the brand.   “She entered the fashion world like Venus coming up out of the ocean,” George Carr, brother to Klein’s creative director, told PEOPLE. “Calvin saw it immediately. Everyone was talking about her.”   After years of risky clothes and fast-fashion overturning every season, the Democrat Kennedys have made ‘conservative’ the trend.   The post Democrat Dynasty Inspires Conservative Fashion Trends appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The second week of March is Civic Learning Week. It’s an annual observance marked by civics advocates with webinars, social media campaigns, and a big conference known as the National Forum, organized by the nonprofit iCivics. This year’s National Forum will take place in Philadelphia, as more than 600 civics leaders, educators, and students will gather to consider the theme of “Liberty and Learning: Civic Education at 250.” Indeed, this year’s Civic Learning Week is an even bigger deal than usual, as we celebrate the nation’s quarter-millennium anniversary. Civics should be the top item on our national agenda. Civic education should matter to every American. It is more than a set of facts that eighth graders should know for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (only 22% of eighth graders were proficient in civics, and 13% were proficient in history in the most recent scoring). Rather, civic education is best understood as a lifelong commitment to the study and practice of America’s distinctive political tradition of self-government.   For all that should give us reason for worry in our country, the good news is that momentum is quickly growing in the movement for what the Princeton-based Institute for Citizens and Scholars calls “civic preparedness.” At all levels of education, institutions and philanthropists are partnering to support a renewed focus on civics. In the fall, the U.S. Department of Education awarded more than $153 million to university-based and nonprofit initiatives to design and implement civics literacy programs in K-12 classrooms and to hold seminars for the nation’s teaching force on “primary documents, constitutional study, historical field experiences, civil discourse, and American achievement.” This represents a welcome federal commitment to civic education in the run-up to the 250th celebration. Among the grantees are ambitious new civics programs at public universities like Arizona State University, Florida State University, and Utah Valley University, along with civic-focused private universities like Pepperdine University and American University. The National Endowment for the Humanities has similarly prioritized investments in public and educational programs for the nation’s 250th birthday.  In addition, major foundations and other philanthropic funders are stepping up to invest in civics. The Chronicle of Philanthropy recently reported on $56 million in philanthropic commitments to civics from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Stand Together, and the Bezos Family Foundation. Stand Together is supporting the Civic Star Challenge, a collaboration between iCivics and the Bill of Rights Institute to encourage student projects emphasizing themes from the Declaration of Independence. The Carnegie Corporation is supporting the Teaching America250 Teaching Awards at the Jack Miller Center, where I serve as president, to provide $5,000 awards for teacher-led projects focused on the Declaration of Independence in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. This is one among several projects we are tackling for the 250th at the Jack Miller Center, where we have been building a network of university professors who are focused on teaching America’s founding principles and history for two decades. For America’s 250th, we are providing direct support to scholars in the Jack Miller Center network to help them organize campus conversations about the Declaration of Independence. These will include lecture series, reading groups, and debates—aimed at fitting the unique needs of campus communities. So far, we have committed to campus programs in 33 states and Washington, D.C.  We are partnering, for example, on a weeklong series of events at Arizona State University on the values of the Founding, a yearlong undergraduate reading group on key primary sources of American political thought and their relation to the declaration at Purdue University Fort Wayne, and an academic panel on the declaration at the University of Georgia, at which students will question scholars regarding the declaration while playing various historical figures. We look forward to building more partnerships with campuses and scholars in the months to come.    We’re also doing what we can to bring the civics movement together as we get ready to convene hundreds of leaders and educators for the National Summit on Civic Education, May 18-19, as we consider “The Words that Changed the World” on Philadelphia’s Independence Mall. We’ll talk about the enduring impact of the Declaration and its importance for the future of American education. As we celebrate America’s 250th, let’s all do our part to educate ourselves and the young people in our lives about the ideas that animate our country and fill our lives with opportunity. Let’s make civics the cause of the year. This article was originally published by RealClearEducation and made available via RealClearWire. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post We Must Invest in Civics for America’s 250th appeared first on The Daily Signal.