10 Reasons Why the Stupak-Pitts Amendment Has to Go
Even if some Democrats who voted for the amendment did so because of deep convictions, the main thrust of the measure is to condemn women for being sexually active.
The truth is that Sarah Palin's current and most immediate struggle isn't against President Obama or the Democratic party or even liberals. It's against the GOP itself.
Even if some Democrats who voted for the amendment did so because of deep convictions, the main thrust of the measure is to condemn women for being sexually active.
The economic meltdown we narrowly averted last year rightfully convinced the American people that we need to re-examine the fundamental structure of our financial system. Naturally, Wall Street disagrees.
Using the RNC's logic, every person who has donated money since 1991 has also funded abortions, because a portion went towards the employer's portion of each employee's health care premium.
Never underestimate how much shear chutzpah, ambition and attractiveness can get a person in this day and age. Try at least $1.2 million.
Not only has Sen. Joe Lieberman been working overtime to smother health reform, he's parked himself squarely in the path of another badly-needed, long-awaited change: FEMA.
If Democrats and progressives are really concerned about middle-class votes -- and they should be -- it's statements like a recent pronouncement by Rachel Maddow that should concern them.
Congress and the administration are addicted to using the taxpayers to prop up the flailing housing market without proper oversight. It is precisely this negligent behavior that got us into this mess.
Nobody promised you this would be easy, Harry. But, hell, why are you there, anyway? Your responsibility is to do the right thing by the American people and bring down future health-care costs.
Peter Galbraith, son of the famed economist, is in line to reap $100 million dollars -- maybe more -- from contracts between a Norwegian oil company and the autonomous Kurdish region of Iraq.
In my view, the real solution to the problem of how to reform health care in this country is a Medicare-for-all, single-payer system.
In a political system like ours dominated by big money and the lobbyists that money hires, democracy requires eternal vigilance, even in years when Democrats control of Congress and the White House.
A narrowing margin in the post-election canvass raises hopes for GOP/Conservatives, but recent Republican-set precedent may well dash that hope.
Had Senate Banking Committee's Chairman Chris Dodd's proposal been effective before the crisis, where would we be today?
This weeks historic meeting between the Obama administration and Indian Country should have been a national celebration. Instead, it was a staid, meaningless political affair.
While the concerns of many white, middle-class people are worthy causes and should be addressed by liberals, it is not elitism to treat this roving band of conspiracy nuts for who they are.
Instead of perpetuating the federal government's over-subsidization of homeowners and under-subsidization of renters, Congress should work to develop a housing policy that helps, not hurts, low-income households.
By moving this basic premise of marriage equality from the sink hole of catastrophic defeat state after state, year after year, to within striking distance of a win, we will eventually reach the finish line.
Even ignoring how critical it is to overhaul our broken health care system, most of the 39 Democrats who voted against reform in the House last week still made a political mistake. Here's why.