Doing away with official reverence for the Confederate battle flag is largely a symbolic move that doesn't come close to addressing the problems surrounding race in America, including disparities in treatment by the criminal justice system and the resurgence of voter suppression laws and other schemes designed to rig the elections in favor of powerful conservative interests.
If we do nothing to create meaningful reform, the black homeowners of 2031 will have just 22 percent of the wealth of their white counterparts. That's a larger gap than before the housing bubble burst of 2008. This is not merely a concern; it's an impending crisis.
The NRA and many gun advocates argue that background checks and registering guns won't work because criminals will still get their guns. Yet it is many of these same conservatives that support voter ID laws despite the fact that criminals will still find ways to commit voter fraud.
Governor Nikki Haley's (R-SC) decision to seek removal of the confederate flag from government property is good news, but she compromised her moral leadership by qualifying words about "heritage," code word for a society explicitly and deliberately structured on racial superiority.
I haven't taken leave of my progressive senses. The Confederate flag is offensive and a blatant affront to any decent human. The claim that it represents Southern heritage or pride in one's ancestors is historically inaccurate and utterly disingenuous.
Some politicians have tried to manipulate voting laws for their benefit, that's not right. We need integrity in our elections and voting that's free, fair, and accessible.
The 2016 election ambitions of the Koch brothers and what they represent on the Republican right wing, free-market absolutism, are nothing short of breathtaking.
In the upcoming performance art piece called the GOP presidential debates the candidates will try to one-up each other showing their base who's best at crushing labor unions, disciplining the poor, and striking fear in the hearts of America's enemies.
Christie now argues that he opposes in-person early voting because it "increase[s] the opportunities for fraud." He offers no evidence to back that assertion, however, probably because there's none available.
There are many competitions in our society, in our country, and in our world. Children, adults, colleges, corporations, etc. are constantly striving to be ranked at the top.
The truth is that the GOP knows it can't push its extreme, out-of-touch agenda on a country where every voice is heard. They know they have to do everything they can to silence the voices of everyday Americans because it's the only way they'll keep winning elections.
I have said that the central issue for the 2016 presidential contest is the restoration and protection of voting rights. It is therefore fitting that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading contender for the Democratic Party's nomination for president in 2016, made voting rights the centerpiece of a speech at a major campaign stop in Houston today.
The same conservatives who succeeded in getting the Supreme Court to gut the Voting Rights Act last year are now attacking the principle of one person, one vote. The purpose of both maneuvers is the same, to help Republicans win elections by diluting or suppressing Democratic votes, in particular the votes of black and brown people.
What's more common sense than making voting more accessible while reducing opportunity for fraud, all while reducing taxpayer costs?
Showing off his trademark bow tie (and famously polite demeanor), retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens this week again ripped into the Citizens United decision but disagreed with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton that overturning it should be a litmus test for a President when choosing Supreme Court nominees.
Across the country, conservatives in particular have debated fiercely whether to pursue voter suppression to remain competitive in an increasingly diverse electorate.