296 Comments

.

Bill Kristol: "Kemp win good."

How so? (Unless you actually prefer Kemp over Stacey Abrams?) I think Abrams would have had a far easier time winning election over Perdue than over Kemp -- I mean, Jon Ossoff beat Perdue

BK: "Raffensperger great."

Same question

I'm fairly certain that the eventual Democratic nominee for GA Sec of State (Bee Nguyen?) would also have an easier time winning election over zero-name-recognition Hice than over the notorious B.I. Raffensperger (slim though those chances might be)

Perhaps that's just your schadenfreude showing?

BK: "So in the big five swing states, Georgia looks for now at least (and who knows how crazed the R state legislators could be) unlikely to engage in election overturning."

Just because a couple guys did the right thing once in 2020 doesn't mean they'll do it again in 2024 -- American democracy would stand a far better chance of surviving in GA with Abrams/Nguyen? in office than with Kemp/Raffensperger

.

Expand full comment
May 26, 2022·edited May 26, 2022

You know Charlie, all of these shooters are known to someone who after the fact reveal concerns or issues about the person. Americans seem unable to be motivated by little children getting murdered but I know we're almost always motivated *by money*; so is there a way to make it financially attractive, and I mean REALLY attractive, to get people to share their concerns with authorities in advance. Sure, that's distasteful (though the anti-abortion crowd is pretty much there), but I'd note the Army certainly encourages this with "insider threat" and similar terrorism training, e.g. "See something, Say something." I don't know how well monetizing law enforcement tips works, statistically, and maybe it's a non-starter. I also don't know what recourse authorities have when no laws have been broken, but I guess my fundamental point is that if there was a substantial financial return for people who take an action that will interrupt a mass shooting event, maybe that would slow things up, perhaps just by virtue of the unwanted exposure. On the other hand, maybe that's too East German secret police-like and I'm just as frustrated as everyone else.

Expand full comment

Ya gotta admire a party that can be anti-abortion and pro-child slaughter in the same 24 hours! Schizophrenic Party?

Expand full comment

Here’s something that can be done immediately: Ban Body Armor sales to anyone except police and security forces and the military. The second amendment, even as egregiously expanded by the poorly-reasoned Heller case, doesn’t cover body armor. Some young guy buying body armor should be investigated, but, honestly, just ban the sale of body armor.

Expand full comment

Sure, but there's lots of YouTube videos on make your own and it's pretty effective. This would argue for making ownership illegal, like hand-grenades or what-ever.

Expand full comment
founding

That confusion is a feature, not a bug. Kinzinger wants to make it easy for moderate conservatives to join in and Country 1st is a name they can feel comfortable with.

Expand full comment

Incandescent anger--agreed. But how about just one simple thing--not letting people under 21 buy assault weapons? The two mass murderers in the past month were 18.

Expand full comment
founding

Democrats need to put forward a bill to ban AR-15s and other automatic Weapons of Mass Destruction. Pass it in the House, then call for a role call vote in the Senate and paste the inevitable loss numbers on the campaign posters of any opposing R Senator up for re-election in November with pictures of Amerie Jo.

Expand full comment

Viewing from NZ we watch with complete bewilderment at the non action and total love affair with guns by US citizens. It is so amazingly obvious to how reduce the risk but nothing happens. Leemings appear to have a greater desire to survive than the US population.

Expand full comment
founding

The majority of U.S. citizens do not have a love affair with guns. A distinct minority does and the majority of one of our major political parties has a love affair with guns.

And the majority are currently being ruled by that minority.

See Ronald Brownstein's article in today's Atlantic about this topic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2022/05/senate-state-bias-filibuster-blocking-gun-control-legislation/638425/

Expand full comment

As, unevolved humans , we stoke divisions based on race, religion , gender, disability etc...we as humans will continue to propagate hate, violence, etc. acting out of neglect, pain, ostracization, abandoment etc etc. The violence we are experiencing and or witnessing is the manisfistation of all of which humans have created. Trauma. Humans need each other to survive. We are programmed to seek , learn , grow, question, reason etc etc, we are the at top of conscienceness as mammals , yet we treat each other barbaricaly. We will never solve problems with the same attitude toward each other that created the problems. I don't care what political party you belong to.

Expand full comment

Until the hoard of ignorant greedy uncaring politicians who have continued to block gun reform meet this horrible tragedy in their own lives nothing will be done. Further, they all have to be re-elected. All need to be removed, by voting them out. What the hell ever happened to power to the people.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, that hoard of ignorant greedy uncaring pols is supported by a host of single-issue voters who demand unfettered access to guns and will punish anyone who tries to deny them. Honestly, I think those voters are more influential than all the money in the NRA.

Expand full comment

When are we going to talk about what is wrong with American men?

Why do men, mostly white, feel they need to shoot other people?

- Just shoot your own head off, stop hurting others just cause you can't handle your FEELINGS

When will American men tell other men to stop shooting others?

When will American men tell other men to stop raping women?

- No, means no!

- Wear a condem, if you don't want to have children

- If you don't want kids and you don't want to wear a party hat - DO NOT HAVE SEX!

When will Ameican men tell other men to PAY TO SUPPORT ALL THEIR CHILDREN!

- None of the anti-abortion laws state the man's responsibility

- Yes, 14 year boys will need to work and be force to support their children for 18 years

- If liitle girls are forced to be moms then little boys must be force to support them

- Yes, we can prove who is the father of every child.

- If you have a child you can't leave the country to ditch paying to support the

children you made, like my husband's Dad did.

- We need a database of all males so we can track them down and FORCE them to

pay for their own kids.

- Why do I have to pay to raise others kids, via my taxes spent to support single

moms? Make the men pay!!

- If a father can't find a job, or won't, they can go to jail to be forced to work to

support their own children!!!!

MEN ARE NOT HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING!!!!

Women don't get pregenant by themselves, yet there is no discussion of holding the men who got women/girls, who didn't want to be pregenant, pregenant. ALL the responsiblity falls on the women.

MEN - STEP UP AND HOLD OTHER MEN ACCOUNTABLE!!!!

Expand full comment

I agree. I in no way meant to imply ALL men.

I'm asking: where are the laws to ensure that my tax dollars will not be used to support "deadbeat Dad's" who refuse to pay to support their own children? Those payments must start at the moment of conception, as there are states legislating that is when life starts. The expenses, kind prego test, start with in weeks. Make the fathers support their own children.

If a 14 year boy gets a girl pregnant he needs to pay to support the baby he made. If he is old enough to get a girl prego by not using birth control, then he doesn't get to off load the costs of raising a child on to the mother, her family, and US tax payers. After school he need to work, mow lawns, pull weeds, wash windows. Stand on the corner and ask people to support the baby he made.

And yes there are terrible women as parents, and if they need to pay to raise their child. Well, since they will have to work they need to work, to pay someone else to raise their baby so they can work. If she is 12, or 14, the victim of rape., incest...

No legal abortion, then we have be serious about paying to raise all these babies and it can't be the tax payers who want to keep abortion legal, the majority per the polls.

Expand full comment

That's a rather sweeping calumny against all men (or "mostly white" men), and some of your assertions are flatly false, such as "men are not held responsible for anything." Some men devote their working lives to holding other men accountable for bad actions.

Right now, I hear lots of American men demanding that more action be taken to stop disturbed teenagers from getting powerful weapons.

I often see stories about men putting themselves at risk to save the lives of other people. Women have also done so, but men will jump into the danger more readily. That's the flip side of a greater natural disposition to violence, but most men are able to restrain it, or channel it into harmless activity.

And by the way, there are women who mistreat or abandon their own children.

Expand full comment

The gun problem won't be solved until the underlying fears that drive excessive gun purchases, especially by untrained people, are reduced. And the far-right noise machine seeks to inflame those fears every day. The myth of "jack-booted government thugs" that are lying in wait to enslave the population upon orders from a Communist president. The myths about brown and black marauders ready to invade homes, rob, and rape wives and daughters the moment they perceive that men are unarmed. The myth of hordes of invaders at the Mexican border.

Republicans and the gun industry play these fears like a fiddle.

Expand full comment

Charlie, we can’t get Republicans to even vote on background checks, so why don’t the Democrats put them in a bit of a corner on a simpler issue. It seems that most of the recent mass shooters have worn tactical body armor. Republicans and the NRA for years have used the mantra that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” But when a bad guy with a gun is wearing tactical armor, that is not true. A retired police office working security in Buffalo, i.e. the good guy with the gun, engaged the mass shooter and died because the shooter had body armor. So how about a simple law making it illegal for citizens (individuals who are not active military or police) to own tactical armor. If it is all about “protect the blue,” why not assist the police by taking away bad guys’ ability to avoid being taken down by the “good guys.”

Expand full comment

It took decades for medical researchers to convince the public that cigarettes WERE the sickness before we allowed those researchers to advise lawmakers of the dangers of cigarette smoking to Americans (even non-smokers), and for sensible restrictions on smoking to become the social norm. I don't know if we will ever come to the point where we will allow the medical community to convince the public that guns ARE the sickness of the present, but perhaps that might be the group that needs to take a stronger stand. If I remember correctly, pediatricians are not even allowed to offer any advice to parents about gun safety and regulations. The medical community could start by demanding that right.

Besides, even most doctors used to smoke and were used in advertising for cigarettes. So, I wouldn't be silenced by any objections that most doctors own guns, if indeed they do.

Expand full comment

We Americans live in a totally violent and cruel society. We willingly allow our children (and adults) to be placed in harms way by subjecting them to the threat of gun violence on a regular basis. No other industrialized nation does this to their citizens.

Assault weapons are weapons of war meant to maim and kill as many people as possible. Talk to any ER doc or surgeon and they will tell you about the catastrophic damage done to the human body by assault weapons. The bullets basically blow up internal organs. These weapons have NO justifiable use except for military or police use. Violent predators using assault weapons are better armed than our police. Beat officers are typically the first to arrive at active crime scenes. They do not carry assault weapons. Those weapons are carried by special teams. How bat shit crazy is it that our politicians think it’s okay for violent predators to be more highly armed than our police?

Anyone who is hoping that this latest massacre will change things is going to be sadly disappointed. It’s sad to say, but if you want to live without the gun madness found in this country, you should consider moving to Canada, Ireland, Britain or a whole host of countries that don’t allow the sort of gun fetish this country promotes.

Expand full comment

I see what you did there w/the Shakespeare quote...

As an inner city public high-school teacher for the last 27 years, I am broken inside...

Expand full comment