Even George W. Bush, who as president pushed the boundaries of executive power, never proposed a statutory scheme to hold people indefinitely.

When a government forcibly holds enough people indefinitely without trial, it evokes the kinds of raids, detention, and abuses of power associated with authoritarian states - or darker periods in American history.

A louder government with less journalism does not enrich our democratic process.

Obama's openness is a welcome change from his predecessor, who went all the way to the Supreme Court to hide the RSVP list for a single policy meeting. And transparency is intrinsically good, since in a democracy, very little government activity is legitimately secret.

If anything, the genuine human struggles in 'Sicko' raise questions about our society that run much deeper than what passes for political discourse today. Why does such a rich nation let people suffer and die without health care?

Obama can show that America's promise of equality not only means that anyone can reach the highest office in the land - it also means that everyone is equally subject to the law.

The Bush administration opened several lines of attack against the rule of law and the integrity of an independent Justice Department. The scandals are so famous that they've been reduced to shorthand: Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, NSA, Attorneygate.

Obama must scrutinize and disassemble the post-Sept. 11 imperial presidency, even if he reduces his own power in the process.

Tea Party adherents are actually more religion-driven and more anti-abortion than the party they are supposedly upending.

Why do Tea Party backers oppose abortion at higher rates than their traditional GOP cohort? Religion.

Tea Party sympathizers are more conservative on abortion policy than typical Republicans.

The Tea Party movement's economic agenda is a matter of emphasis, not exclusion. This is not a single-issue group.

News may not be very profitable anymore, but it sure is popular.

Progressive bloggers should not only write on behalf of the members of America's underclass but also empower them to join the discussion.

Democracy functions better when donors push politicians to win campaigns based on their defining issues instead of using financial pressure for policy changes, favors, or special access.

Only a few bloggers have the audience and credibility to effectively break stories, pressure the traditional media, incubate new ideas, or raise real money. These influential bloggers are usually sharp, opinionated, and focused on the world 'offline.' They refuse to view events through the solipsistic blinders of their own websites.

I feel like I'm totally me, and I feel like the show reflects my intensity, my vibe, and my search for evidence and answers.

My hope is to be a trusted utensil for viewers. Like, literally, 'That thing works. I can rely on that thing.'

I think the challenge for anyone in a visible industry, whether it's media, government, or political organizing, is to take serious criticism seriously and not to live in the shadows of the noise and the concern trolls.

When I get serious criticism - if I get serious criticism - it's about how I'm thinking and engaging in a topic. I can't think of an example of someone saying, 'You're too nice.'

Good lawyering is usually cerebral and impersonally. You can convince a judge with a mastery of facts, detail, and precedent - not a story from the gut about how you feel a certain way.

I think politics is always about dialogue. I think journalism ranges from dialogue to monologue, and there are times when different poles are necessary.

Like any good lawyer, I'm going to maintain a confidentiality of advice offered in confidence.

I don't look at ratings when they come out in the afternoon before the show because I'm focused on that day's show, but I do see the overall numbers.