Why should anyone believe simply electing more Democrats is going to end the war? Where is there any proof that that would help end the war?
To kick this off, I want to ask readers for some input on my first few columns. I want to try to be the first Open Columnist, if you will - and this is just the beginning.
As the federal government remains paralyzed by the Senate's tyranny of the tiny minority and unable to move significant universal health care legislation, states are trying to move into the breach.
The netroots is really going to have to figure out how to meld its bourgeois focus with the kitchen-table concerns of everyday, non-political-junkie Americans.
Washington lobbyists may very well get their way - with the help of a media that refuses to point out blatant conflicts of interest.
Leo Hindery calls it "nonpartisan" - I call it buypartisan. Whatever you want to call it, it is fueled by the very corruption we are seeing on trade, taxes and now on immigration.
How can a newspaper complain about losing readership when, in a major Democratic city, it is providing news analysis from a right-wing Republican who was soundly rejected by voters?
I hope the millionaires in the Senate club can refrain from trying to Santa Claus-ify Paul Wellstone by only recalling him as a nice, friendly, happy man.
The a recent move on Peru, consistent with Edwards' economic populist campaign, drives a wedge right through the heart of the Democratic presidential primary.
As we are opening our country up to more imports made without any regard to product safety standards, we are weakening our domestic systems that are s...