There is more and more evidence that Democrats and progressives are discovering the power of taking on big money in politics as a central issue in their campaign strategies.
Every time the president -- this president or any president -- is allowed to "cut corners" on the Constitutional question of Congressional war powers, it sets a bad precedent for the future, eroding a key Constitutional, democratic speed bump against unnecessary wars of choice.
As I write this, the House has still not managed to pass a bill to deal with the border crisis. They've been trying for a few days now, but have been locked in a serious battle between Tea Party hardliners and Republicans from more moderate districts.
It would almost be amusing if it wasn't for the fact that the world is in chaos. And things aren't much better at home where, among other things, we've got a humanitarian crisis at the border.
Calls for presidential impeachment have cast a shadow over most modern-day presidents. However, the chorus of impeachers seems louder in the past year.
The biggest political event of the week (for Democrats, at any rate) was Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats rolling out a new campaign agenda -- the "Middle Class Jumpstart" -- in the tradition of Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America."
While the most visible women's rights being jeopardized include voting rights and the right to have control over our own bodies, there are more, many more.
Today we felt the embrace of a million people in all the diversity of the rainbow as we marched down San Francisco's Market Street and shared our wide-eyed memories of childhood conversations of Uncle Harvey (Milk) in New York and of Mom, "Little Nancy" in Maryland.
The Bergdahl controversy is almost a caricature of American political discourse in the Obama era, with both sides taking strong and outspoken positions based simply on whether or not they like the president, fighting in the media over something that is not very important, and making sure that the public bickering obscures more significant government decisions and policies. The Bergdahl debate is, at its core, about nothing. More accurately, it is about nothing other than whether or not you like President Obama. One way to see this is to see how easily each side could take the opposite position. If Obama had refused to make the deal, John McCain, Marco Rubio and others would be climbing over each other to denounce President Obama for violating the sacred trust that the military has with each soldier. Tea Party supporters would be waving signs about how Obama is anti-American and contemptuous of the military and its traditions.
Taylor and Crist must prove that their party switch was a principled, rational move, not an act of political opportunism.
There was a noticeable change this week. Republicans as a whole seem to be pivoting away from their stated singular campaign theme of "Obamacare is the root of all the country's problems."
Growing up, in church we had the homily; at home it's what I call the "momily" -- the inspirational and instructive mom-isms that every family has. My mother Nancy Pelosi's momilies were memorable and still echo through the years from my childhood to my motherhood.
We moms are used to temper tantrums and irrational behavior. We get it from our kids, we get it from elected officials and we get it from the right-wing media. (At least one of those groups will grow out of it, we tell ourselves.) That doesn't mean we're going to put up with it.
Benghazi has turned into an investigation about talking points. It has become a political rallying cry for Republicans, who see it as the gift that will keep on giving all the way to November 2016, while overlooking similar such incidents under Republican presidents.
Even the best political analysts don't contemplate is the Latino vote. Should the Democratic Party decide to actively campaign for Latino votes, as Reid did in 2010, a November "Latino Surprise" will save the Democrats.
Is it really asking too much for our elected representatives to take the time to read and understand the laws on which they vote? Why should Congress be held to a lesser standard?