As the Supreme Court guts gun safety laws, it's worth tracking how much the Gun Lobby donates to the Republicans who have stacked the Supreme Court and the number of shooting deaths in their districts. As Robert advises, the best remedy is to vote to hold these MAGA gun lobby politicians accountable. Follow the money and shooting deaths with this map:
How much is your life worth? Mapping gun lobby donations vs. number of shooting victims.
And why has Mitch McConnell thought that his stacking of the Supreme Court and the 5th Circuit been good for the country? Has he actually acted as a patriot supporting the best that we can be?
To Stephen & Jocelyn, you are correct. It is not in their thoughts. All on the right are, “ judicial whores, bought & paid for,” if I might quote another reader/writer.
He has not acted as a patriot. In fact, he didn't allow Obama's candidate for the Supreme Court, and if he is at all upset about the reversal of Roe v. Wade, he has himself to blame. They are all crooks and cowards, in my opinion!
I think this is a powerful way to talk about gun violence/legislation and I want to share it everywhere. I read the disclaimer at the end of the article. "No warranty can be expressed or implied...." and I've never seen one like this before. I am not a research expert and clearly you and Robert trust this source. So if you would, could someone use this to discredit the article?
I used Gun Violence Archive (https://www.gunviolencearchive.org) for details on the shootings data, and OpenSecrets (https://www.opensecrets.org) for the data on lobbying expense. Both are very reputable sources. I include that disclaimer at the bottom of my blogs as standard practice.
Yesterday there was a lengthy live interview of Trump on X by @theallinpod (four tech intellectuals including David Sachs) in which they asked Trump really good questions and he replied by not answering the questions, which related to the present and future, but ranting on and on about what he did when he was President. It was clear that he did not comprehend the questions at all. (A marked decline on cognitive function from when he was campaigning in 2016). One thing he did say several times was that Biden beat Paul Ryan, meaning the Vice Presidential debates when Obama was running for President. So Trump has been preparing by watching the tapes of those debates back in 2008, or maybe 2012 (I don't remember which ones had Ryan running for VP, whether it was McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012.) It is worth watching the 2 hours of the live Q&A and then the comments afterwards. You could see that the four guys were uncomfortable with how bonkers Trump had sounded, but they did a good job of distilling about a dozen policy positions from Trump's ravings. It was disquieting to listen to the whole thing ( I stumbled across it live) but very necessary. A lit of quotes from it have made their way into the news since then.
Trump not preparing for the debate is so typical of his arrogant style. Trump knows nothing and will prove it on the debate stage - if he even bothers to show up! Who could he even enlist at this point to help him prep - it would be impossible to teach him all about US history, global affairs and policy points in one week's time. He wouldn't remember it anyway.
trump knows that he doesn't need to know a thing, that all he needs is a bad joke at someone's expense and to be a bully, to get through life and sort of win. In the debates he will be speaking to a completely different crowd than Biden, a crowd that responds to the sound of power because it's angry at whatever.
There’s a sense in which Trump doesn’t plan to ground his debate in facts. He will propagandize, create impressions. He will counterpunch, but not necessarily address Biden’s punches more than obliquely.
Why? Because Trump understands, and Democrats don’t really understand, that television is a medium for creating impressions, not a good medium for transmitting facts. It’s an advertising and sales medium. Trump mastered that with “The Apprentice”.
Many Americans quickly get bored with facts, even resentful.
Biden faces a daunting challenge in the debate, not least because most Americans respond to impressions, and have difficulty with facts and logic. I hope Biden’s debate preparation takes this fully into account.
Yes, Agreed. Biden will do his job and that is to answer questions about policy. Those that stick fingers in ears and sing/song ‘nah, nah, nah, nanana’ will open mouth and let syllables fall out-they will do and say their worst, it doesn’t matter what they say. All that matters is that people vote blue case when republicans win, we all lose.
His not preparing is the best outcome for us. He will be free to offer the most incomprehensible and vitriolic nonsense continuing to demonstrate his lack of…. Well, just any characteristic reflecting decency.
I didn’t feel like they did much pushing back on any of the stuff he was spouting. They just let him go on with no fact checking. They did do some analyzing afterwards but “All In” seems like an apt name for the podcast.
Yes this interview took place at David Sachs' home where he had held a big-money fundraiser for Trump. All the members of the All-In podcast group, as major venture capitalists, have their own reasons to hope that Trump can be a viable candidate, but for example they know that Trumps pronouncements recently on tariffs and taxes are bonkers. One of the questioners quoted to Trump Larry Summers' recent analysis of that, and all Trump did was to riff on his own feelings about Summers (mostly good.) Clearly Trump is utterly incapable of comprehending the nuances of that question, and most of the others. After Trump signed off, the discussion among the four guys was frank. (While Trump had been going off in left field again and again, I could just imagine them squirming!) but they all are worried about taxes under Biden, and about the inflation under Biden, the height of which is partly the Democrats in Congress' doing. They want immigration skewed toward the tech talent they want to hire, and otherwise have never seen a way to shut down our southern border that they don't like. And they want Ukraine to negotiate NOW and not sacrifice any more lives so that we (NATO) can stick it to Putin, and maybe even get him overthrown. That is not on their wish list at all. I think their biggest disappointment from Trump that day is him diverting away from answering the Gaza war question. All told, each of them tried hard to find the pony in the manure of Trump's word salad, and the couple of times they pinned him down they got the answer they wanted. (No national ban on abortion, for example).
These feckless responses to gun cases and shootings well continue unabated until the demographic criteria of those getting killed changes. When the media reporting is about the Congressperson’s, Justice’s, gun lobbyist’s friends, family members, colleagues or themselves being on the business end of these horrific shootings, only then will we begin to see change. Because these people care only about the money, and simply don’t care about anything or anyone else. They just don’t give a shit.
The Supreme Court has interpreted the 2nd amendment as if it were intended to protect the freedom to bear arms. A true "originalist" would not see it that way.
Consider the context: The centralizing constitution was probably ratified only because the bill or rights was promised. The bill of rights set limits on the federal government ranging from such civil rights as freedom of speech to prohibitions against the quartering of soldiers to limitations on federal actions related to criminal prosecutions, to assurance of a jury trial in a federal civil action as well.
Only the second amendment addresses a state matter -- the need for each state to have a well regulated militia. States did, indeed, regulate the type of weapons to be used and uniforms to be worn in their militias. The second amendment protected states, not individuals. When the 14th amendment expanded the protections of the bill of rights to protections from states as well as the federal government, that applied to those amendments that protected individuals. The 10th amendment makes clear that the previous amendments applied to the federal government. The 2nd amendment, based on the introducing phrase protects the right of states from infringement by the federal government to maintain their militias, not the rights of individuals within the states. For a further analysis, consider Len's Letter #62 A Well Regulated Militia https://lenspoliticalnotes.com/lens-letter-62-a-well-regulated-militia/ in Len's Political Notes. It is the so-called originalists who have departed from the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment.
1. “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment right is not unlimited…. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” Scalia in Heller.
As long as he doesn't get convicted for assaulting Ginny, Thomas is entitled to all the unregistered flintlock black powder rifles he wants.
2. Since a butt stock does not create a "machine gun" as that term is defined by statute, I guess my ol' trusty M-79 grenade launcher is kosher.
Justice Scalia in his opinion stated that the 2nd Amendment is not all inclusive of all types of weapons and unconditional. Somehow this got lost in the discussions
Under/beginning with Scalia, The Supreme Court significantly abandoned the kind of logic employed by Leonard Lubinsky. Textual analysis was in; historical analysis was put on the back burner.
In the most recent gun case, however, there were no important Revolutionary-era texts for SCOTUS’s ‘conservatives’ to reference; so they would have to argue the *absence* of text (legislation restricting guns in domestic disputes) was the equivalent of *genuine* text supporting their pro-gun ideology.
Fortunately for the US and genuine justice, that proved too much of a reach even for most of this Court’s ‘conservatives’.
Thank you, again, Robert. Rahimi is another monument to the Extreme Court’s nonsensical interpretation of the Second Amendment and the right to possess deadly weapons. But I take this chance to point out the absurdity of “originalism,” particularly the new “history and tradition standard.” Under the reading of the originalists, steam engines—let alone diesels—were unknown in 1789, so Congress may not regulate them. The same is true for aircraft. And vaccines, so Congress may not regulate public health (and, I suppose, use of leeches for medical treatment is constitutionally protected). Originalism would trap us in 1789. The idea that the law is shackled by judges’ interpretations of history would just further enmesh us. It would all be funny if it were not tragic.
Agree! also, I think it should be MANDATORY for all five year olds in America to own and carry machine guns, whether they are bump stocks or Uzis, don't you??
This is all about personal freedom. Five year olds should not be forced to carry machine guns, but if they want to, they clearly should have that right.
I think many voters will not actually watch the debate and will rely on news coverage to give them the results. Those who support Trump will claim he win and the same applies to the Biden supporters. Hopefully Independent voters and the traditional Republicans who have not made up their minds about Trump will watch and see the comparison. The key to this debate is how well the moderator's manage Trump and his antics. Historically they have not done a good job. I have confidence in Joe Biden and I know he will come prepared.
A few comments: the right wing of the Supreme Court, like Trump, can’t admit that it was wrong and try to fix it. If we are going to be originalists, then only single shot rifles are ok. I don’t think there were requirements for horses or buggies to be regulated, so why are we required to register and license our cars? Absurd, yes. But so is the Supreme Court.
The analogies are endless. We regulate hunting wildlife and limit fishing, but you could kill several people if you thought they were breaking into your home. We require seat belts but don't require safe storage of weapons that could kill hundreds in minutes.
"Originalism" is nonsense unless it reflects intent. Comparing society and the technologies that existed over two hundred years ago and now - is just plain insultingly stupid.
In Florida, one can open carry an AR-15 while “hunting” and fishing”.Locals have “fished” here on the beach and causeway with AR-15’s.
Interestingly the Florida legislature’s Amendment 2 will be on the ballot supporting the right to hunt and fish.
“House Bill 543 states it's illegal for anyone to openly carry a gun unless pulling it out for self-defense or carrying it to and from a hunting, fishing or camping trip; however, that exception has already been part of Florida law.”
I would very much like to see R voters scale down their apocalyptic scare-mongering over Biden and the radical socialists they are sure he will coddle. They should just listen to Trump. Presuming they identify more with the Freedom Caucus than with the Progressives, the questions of seriousness and senility should be in the mix. Just listen to Trump ramble. Try to hear when a sentence ends and whether they have heard a subject, a verb, and an object. Then try to listen for the time spent on policies. Weigh those times against the times spent on personal grievance and vengeance. And, finally, ask whether anything he says makes coherent sense. The problem with voting for Trump is that he doesn't actually think things; he channels the worst thinking of hard-right advisors like Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and Steve Bannon and now: Project 2025.
Thank you, Robert. In reviewing this recent ruling. You have given us all a mini-course in the history of the usurpation of the Second Amendment by the Far Right. Thanks for your hard work and precision. Some would rightly praise your dedication as "tireless." But I've always thought that word an odd compliment, because it would imply you never get tired. My guess is you and Jill do, frequently and deeply. When you do, please remember, we appreciate and need your mastery of detail, your explanatory precision and your guidance and leadership. With hope and sincere good wishes on a beautiful hot summer day, thank you.
I think Trump will back out of the debate at the last minute over the established rules.
"This ridiculous mic-muting rule by the fake news media is another attempt to gag me, just like that unconstitutional, election-interfering Gag Order that Evil, Conflicted Judge Merchan tried to apply on your Favorite President, me."
I have been overseas for the last three weeks, heading home on Monday. Though trying to remain as detached as I could from the relentless bad news, I must admit it has overwhelmed me, even from this distance. Robert, much as I depend on your daily missives, I’m afraid that in my reading, you have overbalanced in the direction of outrage at the bad news, with less of the positive though realistic encouragement on which myself, and many others, depend. Would you please give us a hit of that Hubbell encouragement? We need a periodic infusion in this grassroots movement, and it will make it easier for me to once again enter the fray as I return home.
I think Robert is even more concerned at recent SCOTUS rulings and news coverage lately. We are all very stressed and working hard for candidates and issues so we cannot fake a lack of worry. All we can do is work hard, celebrate any victories, work harder and have faith that we are reaching the less informed voters in the US to see what is happening. It’s a tall order but one we must rise to.
While Robert stays busy propping us up practically 24/7 - sharing tools with which we can help save democracy - I wonder who is propping him up. Jill, for sure. Anybody else?
Coming home to do patriotic good work. On selected encouraging good news, I think the news that Florida is more in play than we thought, and that Democrats are challenging Republicans in deep red states, like Missouri, and that young people are mobilizing one another (see Robert's report on the Tour to Save Democracy), and Robert's urging us to support Dr. Hook in Texas. Much good news is hard to track because it is scattered, far away from media centers and not particularly striking. A picture of old people (like me) writing postcards or good people registering voters at county fairs in Wisconsin, or the growing number of good folks wearing Biden t-shirts is not going to lead the news hour. Instead we will hear pundits talking about what they think Biden should do in the and reporting that Biden will have to work to overcome the age issue and the fact that the economy is rotten (which it is not). But there is much grassroots news out there. My head sometimes spins with all the news and I want to be a maker of good news rather than an merely an appreciator. But spreading good positive news is doing the work as well. So we give, do the postcards, and tell our friends of the progress being made. Spread the word, spread the work, and spread the need to give money -- see Patrick L. Clary's call to
wipe out Trump's billionaire boost of $50 million in yesterday's Today's Edition comments.
Great response, Patrick! I wish I could do more, but I did just buy my Biden T!, and Mom & I write as many post cards as we are able. (I'm in the middle of some big life transitions, so there's a limit to what I can do, alas.)
No "alas" necessary. You are doing more than most who say they "support" democracy or will vote for Biden. You wear that T with Pride. Last week my wife and I ordered two different ones each. Hope to wear them out before November.
You are doing the hard and expensive work of postcarding -- Chris and I are working on 600 to different states. Thanks for your reply. We've been lucky in many ways and plan on giving more. So never disparage your many gifts to the cause of our time.
More legal detail than I can handle which is one reason you are essential to my survival. But you have explained why I felt sad and happy at the same time. Argh.
My “pro-life” Freedom Caucus Rep’s recent email response to my contact regarding bump stocks:
“First, let me express that the core of the problem is not the absence of law, but the failure to respect human life and human dignity.
Self-reporting is the answer was VP -Wanna- Be Rubio’s canned response:
“On February 27, 2024, I cosponsored the FIREARM Act (S. 3812), which seeks to counter the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy by creating a safe harbor for Federal Firearm Licenses (FFLs) to self-report violations so that they may then correct any accidental errors.”
Customize and send a real postcard to your representative, demanding action on guns.
For every card sent, $1 will be donated to Everytown for Gun Safety.✍️
Interesting responses, Kathy. My response to their response would be to the effect of
"Thank you for acknowledging that there is a failure to respect human life and human dignity. No argument there. But as we wait for the return to that respect, let us utilize the tools we need at our disposal to curtail a mass shooter from displaying his/her disrespect."
Do you think Hunter Biden's checking the wrong box on his gun application paperwork would be an "accidental error?" Or is that far more serious than killing a few people with an unlicensed gun?
As the Supreme Court guts gun safety laws, it's worth tracking how much the Gun Lobby donates to the Republicans who have stacked the Supreme Court and the number of shooting deaths in their districts. As Robert advises, the best remedy is to vote to hold these MAGA gun lobby politicians accountable. Follow the money and shooting deaths with this map:
How much is your life worth? Mapping gun lobby donations vs. number of shooting victims.
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/05/22/gun-lobby-donations-vs-shooting-victims-mapped/
And why has Mitch McConnell thought that his stacking of the Supreme Court and the 5th Circuit been good for the country? Has he actually acted as a patriot supporting the best that we can be?
It’s about power not capability.
Yes... but at what cost to the nation?
Not part of the equation or their thoughts.
Was that a rhetorical question? Because I'm quite certain he really doesn't care. At least, not about We, the People.
To Stephen & Jocelyn, you are correct. It is not in their thoughts. All on the right are, “ judicial whores, bought & paid for,” if I might quote another reader/writer.
He has not acted as a patriot. In fact, he didn't allow Obama's candidate for the Supreme Court, and if he is at all upset about the reversal of Roe v. Wade, he has himself to blame. They are all crooks and cowards, in my opinion!
And he has said that he’ll vote for convicted felon Trump! Talk about the party of law and order
I forgot that one! He must be planning to run again, or something equally horrible!
He just cares about his legacy in the GOP. He’s put party and position well ahead of country
Thank you Deepak for this fabulous compilation of data! I will be sharing !
I think this is a powerful way to talk about gun violence/legislation and I want to share it everywhere. I read the disclaimer at the end of the article. "No warranty can be expressed or implied...." and I've never seen one like this before. I am not a research expert and clearly you and Robert trust this source. So if you would, could someone use this to discredit the article?
Terry,
I used Gun Violence Archive (https://www.gunviolencearchive.org) for details on the shootings data, and OpenSecrets (https://www.opensecrets.org) for the data on lobbying expense. Both are very reputable sources. I include that disclaimer at the bottom of my blogs as standard practice.
Yesterday there was a lengthy live interview of Trump on X by @theallinpod (four tech intellectuals including David Sachs) in which they asked Trump really good questions and he replied by not answering the questions, which related to the present and future, but ranting on and on about what he did when he was President. It was clear that he did not comprehend the questions at all. (A marked decline on cognitive function from when he was campaigning in 2016). One thing he did say several times was that Biden beat Paul Ryan, meaning the Vice Presidential debates when Obama was running for President. So Trump has been preparing by watching the tapes of those debates back in 2008, or maybe 2012 (I don't remember which ones had Ryan running for VP, whether it was McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012.) It is worth watching the 2 hours of the live Q&A and then the comments afterwards. You could see that the four guys were uncomfortable with how bonkers Trump had sounded, but they did a good job of distilling about a dozen policy positions from Trump's ravings. It was disquieting to listen to the whole thing ( I stumbled across it live) but very necessary. A lit of quotes from it have made their way into the news since then.
Trump not preparing for the debate is so typical of his arrogant style. Trump knows nothing and will prove it on the debate stage - if he even bothers to show up! Who could he even enlist at this point to help him prep - it would be impossible to teach him all about US history, global affairs and policy points in one week's time. He wouldn't remember it anyway.
trump knows that he doesn't need to know a thing, that all he needs is a bad joke at someone's expense and to be a bully, to get through life and sort of win. In the debates he will be speaking to a completely different crowd than Biden, a crowd that responds to the sound of power because it's angry at whatever.
I agree, but with a different ‘twist’:
There’s a sense in which Trump doesn’t plan to ground his debate in facts. He will propagandize, create impressions. He will counterpunch, but not necessarily address Biden’s punches more than obliquely.
Why? Because Trump understands, and Democrats don’t really understand, that television is a medium for creating impressions, not a good medium for transmitting facts. It’s an advertising and sales medium. Trump mastered that with “The Apprentice”.
Many Americans quickly get bored with facts, even resentful.
Biden faces a daunting challenge in the debate, not least because most Americans respond to impressions, and have difficulty with facts and logic. I hope Biden’s debate preparation takes this fully into account.
Yes, Agreed. Biden will do his job and that is to answer questions about policy. Those that stick fingers in ears and sing/song ‘nah, nah, nah, nanana’ will open mouth and let syllables fall out-they will do and say their worst, it doesn’t matter what they say. All that matters is that people vote blue case when republicans win, we all lose.
Totally agree
His not preparing is the best outcome for us. He will be free to offer the most incomprehensible and vitriolic nonsense continuing to demonstrate his lack of…. Well, just any characteristic reflecting decency.
2012 Romney Ryan. And both appear to loathe Trump and worry about his cognitive abilities
I didn’t feel like they did much pushing back on any of the stuff he was spouting. They just let him go on with no fact checking. They did do some analyzing afterwards but “All In” seems like an apt name for the podcast.
Yes this interview took place at David Sachs' home where he had held a big-money fundraiser for Trump. All the members of the All-In podcast group, as major venture capitalists, have their own reasons to hope that Trump can be a viable candidate, but for example they know that Trumps pronouncements recently on tariffs and taxes are bonkers. One of the questioners quoted to Trump Larry Summers' recent analysis of that, and all Trump did was to riff on his own feelings about Summers (mostly good.) Clearly Trump is utterly incapable of comprehending the nuances of that question, and most of the others. After Trump signed off, the discussion among the four guys was frank. (While Trump had been going off in left field again and again, I could just imagine them squirming!) but they all are worried about taxes under Biden, and about the inflation under Biden, the height of which is partly the Democrats in Congress' doing. They want immigration skewed toward the tech talent they want to hire, and otherwise have never seen a way to shut down our southern border that they don't like. And they want Ukraine to negotiate NOW and not sacrifice any more lives so that we (NATO) can stick it to Putin, and maybe even get him overthrown. That is not on their wish list at all. I think their biggest disappointment from Trump that day is him diverting away from answering the Gaza war question. All told, each of them tried hard to find the pony in the manure of Trump's word salad, and the couple of times they pinned him down they got the answer they wanted. (No national ban on abortion, for example).
My take in a comment on X was two words: Chauncey Gardiner.
Sharon, do you have a link that does not require that one sign up for Xitter?
I found it in Apple Podcasts. “All In”
Laura G below found it in Apple Podcasts searching on "All In".
These feckless responses to gun cases and shootings well continue unabated until the demographic criteria of those getting killed changes. When the media reporting is about the Congressperson’s, Justice’s, gun lobbyist’s friends, family members, colleagues or themselves being on the business end of these horrific shootings, only then will we begin to see change. Because these people care only about the money, and simply don’t care about anything or anyone else. They just don’t give a shit.
Voters want gun control overwhelming. Republicans supported by the NRA don’t. Until we change this dynamic we cannot change the situation.
Short of introducing serious campaign finance laws worthy of a functioning democracy and sacking Citizens United nothing will change. Nothing.
Media coverage of GOP victimization by gun violence will never occur because it will be stifled by the gun lobby.
The Supreme Court has interpreted the 2nd amendment as if it were intended to protect the freedom to bear arms. A true "originalist" would not see it that way.
Consider the context: The centralizing constitution was probably ratified only because the bill or rights was promised. The bill of rights set limits on the federal government ranging from such civil rights as freedom of speech to prohibitions against the quartering of soldiers to limitations on federal actions related to criminal prosecutions, to assurance of a jury trial in a federal civil action as well.
Only the second amendment addresses a state matter -- the need for each state to have a well regulated militia. States did, indeed, regulate the type of weapons to be used and uniforms to be worn in their militias. The second amendment protected states, not individuals. When the 14th amendment expanded the protections of the bill of rights to protections from states as well as the federal government, that applied to those amendments that protected individuals. The 10th amendment makes clear that the previous amendments applied to the federal government. The 2nd amendment, based on the introducing phrase protects the right of states from infringement by the federal government to maintain their militias, not the rights of individuals within the states. For a further analysis, consider Len's Letter #62 A Well Regulated Militia https://lenspoliticalnotes.com/lens-letter-62-a-well-regulated-militia/ in Len's Political Notes. It is the so-called originalists who have departed from the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment.
1. “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment right is not unlimited…. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” Scalia in Heller.
As long as he doesn't get convicted for assaulting Ginny, Thomas is entitled to all the unregistered flintlock black powder rifles he wants.
2. Since a butt stock does not create a "machine gun" as that term is defined by statute, I guess my ol' trusty M-79 grenade launcher is kosher.
Justice Scalia in his opinion stated that the 2nd Amendment is not all inclusive of all types of weapons and unconditional. Somehow this got lost in the discussions
Under/beginning with Scalia, The Supreme Court significantly abandoned the kind of logic employed by Leonard Lubinsky. Textual analysis was in; historical analysis was put on the back burner.
In the most recent gun case, however, there were no important Revolutionary-era texts for SCOTUS’s ‘conservatives’ to reference; so they would have to argue the *absence* of text (legislation restricting guns in domestic disputes) was the equivalent of *genuine* text supporting their pro-gun ideology.
Fortunately for the US and genuine justice, that proved too much of a reach even for most of this Court’s ‘conservatives’.
"Two things are scheduled for next week: The Supreme Court should issue its immunity decision, and President Biden will debate Donald Trump."
The timing, proximity, and order of these two events may become historically significant.
Add The Second Anniversary of Dobbs. June 24, 2022.
Trump brags he got rid of Roe.
We will remember
November
Roevember
Joevember
Thank you, again, Robert. Rahimi is another monument to the Extreme Court’s nonsensical interpretation of the Second Amendment and the right to possess deadly weapons. But I take this chance to point out the absurdity of “originalism,” particularly the new “history and tradition standard.” Under the reading of the originalists, steam engines—let alone diesels—were unknown in 1789, so Congress may not regulate them. The same is true for aircraft. And vaccines, so Congress may not regulate public health (and, I suppose, use of leeches for medical treatment is constitutionally protected). Originalism would trap us in 1789. The idea that the law is shackled by judges’ interpretations of history would just further enmesh us. It would all be funny if it were not tragic.
Personal ownership of nuclear weapons, which are armaments, also cannot be constitutionally abridged. Yay 1789!
Agree! also, I think it should be MANDATORY for all five year olds in America to own and carry machine guns, whether they are bump stocks or Uzis, don't you??
This is all about personal freedom. Five year olds should not be forced to carry machine guns, but if they want to, they clearly should have that right.
Oh, too true. Wouldn't want to force anyone to do anything, like be a Christian or a government-mandated pregnancy
I think many voters will not actually watch the debate and will rely on news coverage to give them the results. Those who support Trump will claim he win and the same applies to the Biden supporters. Hopefully Independent voters and the traditional Republicans who have not made up their minds about Trump will watch and see the comparison. The key to this debate is how well the moderator's manage Trump and his antics. Historically they have not done a good job. I have confidence in Joe Biden and I know he will come prepared.
Thus, the need for olfactometers.
#trumpstinks
A few comments: the right wing of the Supreme Court, like Trump, can’t admit that it was wrong and try to fix it. If we are going to be originalists, then only single shot rifles are ok. I don’t think there were requirements for horses or buggies to be regulated, so why are we required to register and license our cars? Absurd, yes. But so is the Supreme Court.
Well said, Peter.
The analogies are endless. We regulate hunting wildlife and limit fishing, but you could kill several people if you thought they were breaking into your home. We require seat belts but don't require safe storage of weapons that could kill hundreds in minutes.
"Originalism" is nonsense unless it reflects intent. Comparing society and the technologies that existed over two hundred years ago and now - is just plain insultingly stupid.
In Florida, one can open carry an AR-15 while “hunting” and fishing”.Locals have “fished” here on the beach and causeway with AR-15’s.
Interestingly the Florida legislature’s Amendment 2 will be on the ballot supporting the right to hunt and fish.
“House Bill 543 states it's illegal for anyone to openly carry a gun unless pulling it out for self-defense or carrying it to and from a hunting, fishing or camping trip; however, that exception has already been part of Florida law.”
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/verify/no-floridas-new-constitutional-carry-law-does-not-make-it-an-open-carry-state/77-5819eb7e-82a5-4364-9f72-86edff6e7f16
I would very much like to see R voters scale down their apocalyptic scare-mongering over Biden and the radical socialists they are sure he will coddle. They should just listen to Trump. Presuming they identify more with the Freedom Caucus than with the Progressives, the questions of seriousness and senility should be in the mix. Just listen to Trump ramble. Try to hear when a sentence ends and whether they have heard a subject, a verb, and an object. Then try to listen for the time spent on policies. Weigh those times against the times spent on personal grievance and vengeance. And, finally, ask whether anything he says makes coherent sense. The problem with voting for Trump is that he doesn't actually think things; he channels the worst thinking of hard-right advisors like Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and Steve Bannon and now: Project 2025.
It’s not really about Trump. He is a figurehead or a symbol of the concept of Republicans having unbridled control.
He would hate hearing that it's not all about him!!
They are visceral. Thus try "Trump hates dogs." https://rvat.org/
Daniel Solomon hits the nail on the head: Trump appeals to people’s visceral feelings, not logic.
Don't waste energy trying to use logic refute visceral appeals. It won’g work: they exist in different mental universes.
Sent to my sibs ...
Thank you, Robert. In reviewing this recent ruling. You have given us all a mini-course in the history of the usurpation of the Second Amendment by the Far Right. Thanks for your hard work and precision. Some would rightly praise your dedication as "tireless." But I've always thought that word an odd compliment, because it would imply you never get tired. My guess is you and Jill do, frequently and deeply. When you do, please remember, we appreciate and need your mastery of detail, your explanatory precision and your guidance and leadership. With hope and sincere good wishes on a beautiful hot summer day, thank you.
Amen!
Double ditto!!
I just submitted some money to Dr. Hook’s campaign.
I think Trump will back out of the debate at the last minute over the established rules.
"This ridiculous mic-muting rule by the fake news media is another attempt to gag me, just like that unconstitutional, election-interfering Gag Order that Evil, Conflicted Judge Merchan tried to apply on your Favorite President, me."
I have been overseas for the last three weeks, heading home on Monday. Though trying to remain as detached as I could from the relentless bad news, I must admit it has overwhelmed me, even from this distance. Robert, much as I depend on your daily missives, I’m afraid that in my reading, you have overbalanced in the direction of outrage at the bad news, with less of the positive though realistic encouragement on which myself, and many others, depend. Would you please give us a hit of that Hubbell encouragement? We need a periodic infusion in this grassroots movement, and it will make it easier for me to once again enter the fray as I return home.
I think Robert is even more concerned at recent SCOTUS rulings and news coverage lately. We are all very stressed and working hard for candidates and issues so we cannot fake a lack of worry. All we can do is work hard, celebrate any victories, work harder and have faith that we are reaching the less informed voters in the US to see what is happening. It’s a tall order but one we must rise to.
Agreed.
While Robert stays busy propping us up practically 24/7 - sharing tools with which we can help save democracy - I wonder who is propping him up. Jill, for sure. Anybody else?
Gestalt therapy. Register Democrats to save the world.
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Keep your home or apartment overseas for another 6 months if you can
I wish I could, but I need to get home. I will be busy for the next several months writing letters and postcards to voters to boost Dem turnout.
Coming home to do patriotic good work. On selected encouraging good news, I think the news that Florida is more in play than we thought, and that Democrats are challenging Republicans in deep red states, like Missouri, and that young people are mobilizing one another (see Robert's report on the Tour to Save Democracy), and Robert's urging us to support Dr. Hook in Texas. Much good news is hard to track because it is scattered, far away from media centers and not particularly striking. A picture of old people (like me) writing postcards or good people registering voters at county fairs in Wisconsin, or the growing number of good folks wearing Biden t-shirts is not going to lead the news hour. Instead we will hear pundits talking about what they think Biden should do in the and reporting that Biden will have to work to overcome the age issue and the fact that the economy is rotten (which it is not). But there is much grassroots news out there. My head sometimes spins with all the news and I want to be a maker of good news rather than an merely an appreciator. But spreading good positive news is doing the work as well. So we give, do the postcards, and tell our friends of the progress being made. Spread the word, spread the work, and spread the need to give money -- see Patrick L. Clary's call to
wipe out Trump's billionaire boost of $50 million in yesterday's Today's Edition comments.
Great response, Patrick! I wish I could do more, but I did just buy my Biden T!, and Mom & I write as many post cards as we are able. (I'm in the middle of some big life transitions, so there's a limit to what I can do, alas.)
We all have to do what we can, and it all adds up.
No "alas" necessary. You are doing more than most who say they "support" democracy or will vote for Biden. You wear that T with Pride. Last week my wife and I ordered two different ones each. Hope to wear them out before November.
You are doing the hard and expensive work of postcarding -- Chris and I are working on 600 to different states. Thanks for your reply. We've been lucky in many ways and plan on giving more. So never disparage your many gifts to the cause of our time.
Speaking of Project 2025, John Oliver (TY Joyce Vance) has made the following available. It's 20 minutes and I thought it worth sharing: https://x.com/blueatlgeorgia/status/1802904289783767542?s=46&t=38dkbiTLOtgXqtUehWpnZg
I just posted it too! Sorry to be redundant.
More legal detail than I can handle which is one reason you are essential to my survival. But you have explained why I felt sad and happy at the same time. Argh.
My “pro-life” Freedom Caucus Rep’s recent email response to my contact regarding bump stocks:
“First, let me express that the core of the problem is not the absence of law, but the failure to respect human life and human dignity.
Self-reporting is the answer was VP -Wanna- Be Rubio’s canned response:
“On February 27, 2024, I cosponsored the FIREARM Act (S. 3812), which seeks to counter the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy by creating a safe harbor for Federal Firearm Licenses (FFLs) to self-report violations so that they may then correct any accidental errors.”
Customize and send a real postcard to your representative, demanding action on guns.
For every card sent, $1 will be donated to Everytown for Gun Safety.✍️
https://congress.cards/campaign/gun-safety
Interesting responses, Kathy. My response to their response would be to the effect of
"Thank you for acknowledging that there is a failure to respect human life and human dignity. No argument there. But as we wait for the return to that respect, let us utilize the tools we need at our disposal to curtail a mass shooter from displaying his/her disrespect."
p.s. Thanks for this link on gun safety!
Do you think Hunter Biden's checking the wrong box on his gun application paperwork would be an "accidental error?" Or is that far more serious than killing a few people with an unlicensed gun?