The quickest way to describe the 45-minute meeting is as a tug-of-war between two ideas: a) blanket surveillance is fundamentally unconstitutional and needs to stop and b) NSA surveillance programs need to be tweaked to rein in some level of over-reach.
U.S. policy regarding chemical weapons has been so inconsistent and politicized that the United States is in no position to take leadership in a military response to any use of such weaponry by Syria.
In the 12 years since September 11, 2001, I've remembered viscerally the horror of the second plane, the hug from my mom, and the harmony on the Capitol Steps. In this September 11 anniversary, I remain ever hopeful for that harmony.
It is not yet clear whether the Russian plan is the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end of chemical weapons in Syria, but one way or the other, mass murder by chemical weapons, a crime against humanity, must not be tolerated.
In this case, it's the Australian elections. Conservative Tony Abbott led his Liberal-National coalition to a smashing victory over Prime Minister Kevin Rudd Saturday, leaving the Labor Party at a 100-year electoral low point.
f you've participated in talking about Syria at all, you've probably seen the uptick of AIPAC's work. They've been all over the Web the last couple of days. In general, trying to divide Americans and set them against each other in mindless knee jerk tirades.
I'm baffled by what Obama is doing and have been for more than a week. If he had determined to attack, which I think is highly questionable strategy, he should have done it right away, fast and hard. The U.S. Navy had the ships on station to carry out the strikes.
Hell hath no fury like war-makers scorned. Simmering rage will be palpable from political elites who do not want to see Congress set an unprecedented precedent: thwarting the will of a president who wants Pentagon firepower unleashed on another country.
Leaving aside whether or not military action in Syria is a wise policy move for President Obama, politically a move to consult with Congress and debate the matter on the floor offers both risk and reward for the White House.
We knew the verdict was coming; still, the reality of it was a punch in the gut for millions of Americans who hoped that George Zimmerman's killing the unarmed Trayvon Martin would end with conviction. What is to be done?
Twenty Representatives showed courage and leadership on the House floor last night by voting against the new sanctions. In defying the majority of their peers (400 representatives voted in favor) and the pro-war lobby, they exposed themselves to attack.
Organizations must create "policies and practices that will allow women to flourish and advance." How is your employer advancing the core pillars of this agenda?
Rep. Pelosi strikes me as the kind of person committed enough to substance to let someone else hold the gavel while she wields the real power and does what is right for the American people.
It's now painfully clear that the president has put out a contract on the Fourth Amendment. And at the Capitol, the hierarchies of both parties are stuffing it into the trunks of their limousines, so each provision can be neatly fitted with cement shoes and delivered to the bottom of the Potomac.
You've tried to appease the Tea Party over the last four years, and what have you gotten for it? A constant threat of being deposed if you defy the will of a faction that is so focused on a minoritarian agenda that it could very well bring down the Grand Old Party.
From the perspective of a straight white guy perched on the left coast, there seem to be three reasons why the women's movement hasn't produced gender equity.