Either we're removing a dictator who currently has plans to fund terrorism against American citizens or -- if Bush is completely wrong and Eleanor Clift is completely right -- we're just removing a dictator who plans to terrorize a lot of people in the region, but not Americans specifically. Even for someone like me, who doesn't want America to be the world's policeman, the risk of precipitous action against Saddam Hussein doesn't keep me up at night.

Isn't food important? Why not "universal food coverage"? If politicians and employers had guaranteed us "free" food 50 years ago, today Democrats would be wailing about the "food crisis" in America, and you'd be on the phone with your food care provider arguing about whether or not a Reuben sandwich with fries was covered under your plan.

In California, the fabulously rich support the poor with government jobs, paid for by the middle class which is now living in Arizona.

Since Vice President Al Gore is constantly making things up, it should come as no surprise that he wants Supreme Court justices who will do the same. As Gore put it, he will appoint judges who view the Constitution as a 'document that grows'.

I'm thinking of writing a book on national health care. It will be 2,000 pages, and you'll have two hours to read it.

They spent the night in jail, where their progressive views on gay marriage served them well.

Republicans are afraid to act in accordance with the election results. Republicans seem to be in denial about election results. It's one thing for Democrats to be in denial about the Republican electoral juggernaut, but it's strange that Republicans are in denial about it too.