Having given up on trying to persuade Americans that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens will reduce the murder rate, Democrats have turned to their usual prohibitionary argument: "Why does anyone need (an assault weapon, a 30-round magazine, a semiautomatic, etc., etc.)?"
In late February, the United States Supreme Court will consider a case that invokes American history, constitutional meaning, and the realities of present-day voting in a large portion of our nation.
A top priority of Democrats nationwide is to try to expand early voting even beyond the more than 40-plus million votes that were cast on days other than Election Day in 2012 or by mail. The present system balkanizes and deprives our nation of the unifying value of one nation on Election Day.
I apologize to America's young people, whose dashed dreams and dim employment prospects I had laughed at, believing these to be a direct result of their voting for Obama.
After several weeks of endless postmortems of the 2012 presidential contest, Republicans seem to be trending in most articles as being in disarray and with little hope of regaining the White House for years to come, if ever in our lifetime.
A mother tries to control her son who is having a hard time coping with Obama's reelection.
In 2000, conservatives were obligated to explain why they supported preservation of the Electoral College even though it produced a victory for their candidate, George W. Bush. In coming elections, their devotion may face a sterner test: Will they favor it if Democrats win the White House even when Republicans carry the popular vote?
Supporters of same-sex marriage have reason to cheer after last week's election. Supporters of democratic self-government, even those of us who oppose gay marriage, do too.
The United States Constitution provides for an indirect election of the President. That is, you didn't vote for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney last week; you voted for electors pledged to vote for one or the other.