Some idealists suggest that election campaigns be paid for by the Treasury -- taxpayers would pay for campaigns intended to elect people we don't like. In fact, we DO have public campaign funding but nobody wants to admit it.

The left-wing blogsphere claim that Hillary's people stole the election from Obama. The evidence, if true, is staggering.

A president is supposed to be emotionally stable, not a weeping willow.

The conservatives have rightly complained about the fiasco that was the CNN/YouTube debate, to say nothing of Chris Matthews' execrable moderating. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and it doesn't fit any better on that side.

Here, we propose some resolutions for the major candidates to consider.

Of course Mr. Musharraf doesn't want to share power. Who does? Does The Times want to share power and influence with the LA Times or with the Washington Post? Of course not.

With fifty states in the union, we have fifty different laboratories in which to test different approaches to a problem.

Once again, lawbreakers get a nice fat Christmas present, while the longsuffering voters get "nothing but hooks and some wire."

Don't regulate campaign finance; just require disclosure.

Can we have a little dignity please?