Archive by Author

Jill Biden says first couple works out differences via texts

Jill Biden says she and President Biden rarely raise their voices in an argument — because they usually hammer out their quarrels via text messages.

The first couple coined a term for the way they bicker, “fexting,” the first lady tells Harper’s Bazaar in its June/July issue, released Tuesday.

The profile describes why she and the commander in chief first began “hashing out their occasional spats over text,” saying the pair aimed to “avoid fighting in front of the Secret Service.”

Jill Biden revealed that recently she let her fingers do the fighting in what the mag described as a “fit of pique.”

“Joe said, ‘You realize that’s going to go down in history. There will be a record of that,’” she recalled with a grin remembering her potentially NSFW text to the president.

The Bidens will mark their 45th wedding anniversary next month.

“I won’t tell you what I called him that time,” she teased.

Biden, who grew up outside of Philadelphia, is seen posing in a series of locations around the Pennsylvania city in the Harper’s issue.

In the interview, she described her first marriage to Bill Stevenson, which ended in divorce in 1975, and how it jolted her into prioritizing independence.

“I believed so much in the institution of marriage,” she explains. “When the marriage fell apart, I fell hard because of that,” Biden, 70, said.

“I knew I would never, ever put myself in that position again — where I didn’t feel like I had the finances to be on my own, that I had to get the money through a divorce settlement,” Biden told the magazine.

“I drummed that into [my daughter], Ashley: Be independent, be independent,” she added.

“And my granddaughters — you have to be able to stand on your own two feet.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Let Biden be Biden

Hours after the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, with very little time to prepare, President Biden expressed the nation’s outrage in a televised prime-time address: “When in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby?” he asked. “When in God’s name will we do what we all know needs to be done?”

Biden’s words met the moment. Polling conducted after the massacre found that 88 percent approve of required background checks on all gun sales; 84 percent support preventing firearm sales to anyone declared dangerous by a mental health provider to law enforcement; 81 percent believe that private gun sales and sales at gun shows should be subject to background checks; 77 percent support requiring gun owners to store their weapons in a safe storage unit; 75 percent want a national database containing information about each gun sale; and 67 percent approve of banning assault-style weapons.

Biden’s outrage was not the first time he recently captured the mood of the country. After visiting Ukrainian refugees in Poland, Biden said of Russian President Vladimir Putin: “For God’s sake this man cannot remain in power.” During his visit to Asia, Biden was asked if the United States would, if necessary, militarily defend Taiwan and answered, “That’s the commitment we made.”

In both cases, administration officials were quick to declare that U.S. policy toward Russia and China remained unchanged. But Biden’s answers were strategic. When asked whether Putin would escalate the war following Biden’s condemnation, the president responded: “I don’t care what he thinks. He’s going to do what he’s going to do.”

Pundit Joe Scarborough reacted to Biden’s announcement, saying, “Thank you,” adding that it’s about time for Putin to care what Biden thinks. His “Morning Joe”co-host, Mika Brzezinski, echoed her endorsement of Biden’s candor, saying, “It only gets better.” As for Taiwan, Biden put China on notice that any invasion would have consequences. As Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) noted, “The time for ambiguity is over.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) agreed, “The bullies of the world need to know we’re going to take a stand.”

The Biden White House has often been overly protective of a president who once described himself as a “gaffe machine.” Biden has been known to speak off-the-cuff, making remarks that later had to be clarified. Biden is hardly the first president to be gaffe prone. During his 1980 campaign, Ronald Reagan declared that the Vietnam War was a “noble cause,” expressed doubts about the theory of evolution and claimed that 80 percent of air pollution was caused by plants and trees, prompting his press secretary, James Brady, to joke about “killer trees.”

Jimmy Carter’s chief strategist, Hamilton Jordan, was thrilled, “For two weeks, it was delicious, watching Reagan on the news each night stumble from one controversy to another, doing what we had thought we’d have to do — making him, not the president, the issue.” Reagan’s staff staged an intervention, and thereafter the candidate stuck to the script.

During Reagan’s presidency, conservatives were fond of the refrain “Let Reagan Be Reagan.” They believed Reagan was being muzzled from saying what he really believed. They were right. When it came to the most memorable lines of the Reagan years, his staff attempted to edit his remarks. For example, at his first press conference in 1981, Reagan declared that the “only morality” the Soviet Union recognizes “is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat.”

Two years later, Reagan called the Soviet Union an “evil empire” whose communist ideology “is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written.” In 1988, Reagan delivered a powerful address standing before the Brandenburg Gate and Berlin Wall and spoke these memorable lines: “Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Each time, Reagan’s staff argued that those words should not be spoken, and each time, Reagan resisted. Today, those phrases are among the best-remembered and most often-quoted of the Reagan presidency.

Like Reagan, another president ignored his advisers and said what he believed. In 1948, facing insuperable odds of winning reelection, President Truman boarded a train and began a grueling nationwide tour. Up to then, Truman would woodenly read his prepared speeches, demonstrating none of the artistry Franklin D. Roosevelt had in delivering his fireside chats. But at each whistlestop, armed with a few note cards and no script, Truman would speak extemporaneously, introducing his wife, Bess, as “the boss,” and his daughter, Margaret, as “the boss’s boss.” Truman then made his case for more New Deal and Fair Deal legislation before the throngs who came out to see him. Remarkably, he beat the odds-on-favorite, Thomas E. Dewey, whom the pundits crowned the winner before a single vote was cast.

Joe Biden, Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman were powerful general election candidates. Like Reagan, Biden has never lost a general election. Truman lost only once, in 1924, thanks to an internal Democratic Party feud that cost him votes. The lesson for the Biden White House is clear: Let Biden be Biden.

John Kenneth White is a professor of politics at the Catholic University of America. His latest book is titled “What Happened to the Republican Party?”

Source: TEST FEED1

Texas Democrat calls for hearings on Uvalde school shooting

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), who chairs the House Judiciary subcommittee on crime, is calling for hearings on Capitol Hill to examine last week’s mass shooting at an elementary school shooting in Uvalde, Texas.

“We will look comprehensively at Uvalde and the incident that occurred last Tuesday,” Jackson Lee told The Washington Post.

“We have children murdered as though they were at battle,” she added. “And that is not fitting of this nation.”

Jackson Lee, who represents a district a few hours away from Uvalde, attended a church service with President Biden and first lady Jill Biden in the city over Memorial Day weekend, the Post noted.

The Bidens visited Texas on Sunday to pay respects to the 21 people killed in the school shooting and attended a Catholic Mass honoring the victims.

In the wake of the school shooting, the president stated last week that the country should have “common sense” gun laws that will have “no impact” on the Second Amendment.

“The Second Amendment is not absolute. When it was passed you couldn’t own a cannon, you couldn’t own certain kinds of weapons,” Biden said one day after the massacre. “There’s just always been limitations.”

A bipartisan group of senators also began meeting last week in an effort to reach compromises on gun legislation.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who is leading those talks, tweeted that he has “been on the phone today w Republican and Democratic Senators trying to find the common denominator on a gun violence bill.”

“Senator [Majority Leader Charles] Schumer [D-N.Y.] has given us just over a week to find a compromise. This time, failure cannot be an option,” Murphy added.

The group is expected to meet Tuesday via a Zoom call with discussions on expanding background checks and red flag laws possible.

Source: TEST FEED1

Zelensky warns of famine risk from Russian blockade of Ukrainian ports

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a Monday address warned that there is a “threat of famine” on a global scale due to Russia’s blockade of Ukrainian ports.

Zelensky said a Russian blockade on the Black Sea was preventing exports of grain from Ukraine, which along with Russia is one of the world’s biggest producers of wheat.

“Now, due to the fact that Russia has blocked our ports in the Black Sea and seized our part of the coast of the Sea of Azov, we cannot export 22 million tons of grain that are already in warehouses in our country,” said Zelensky. “This is the volume that was to enter the foreign market.”

“And Russia’s blockade of our exports is destabilizing the situation on a global scale. As a result, food is becoming increasingly expensive in different countries. Consequently, there is a threat of famine. In Africa, in Asia, in some European countries.”

Fears of severe food shortages because of the Russian-Ukraine war have been growing as it becomes clear there is no end of the fighting in sight.

Zelensky also claimed that “the Russian invaders have already stolen at least half a million tons of grain and are now looking for ways to illegally sell it somewhere. To sell it in a way to make money on what was stolen and to keep the deficit in the legal market.”

“And this is what the Russian leadership clearly wants. They are deliberately creating this problem. So that the whole of Europe faces difficulties. And so that Ukraine does not receive billions of dollars for its exports,” he said.

Zelensky also warned that the food crisis could aggravate the migrant crisis occurring in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in late February. Millions of people have fled Ukraine amid the fighting.

Zelensky urged European governments to respond to the Russian blockade by implementing new sanctions on Russia, particularly on Russian oil.

“I believe that Europe will have to give up Russian oil and oil products in any case,” he said. “Because this is about the independence of Europeans themselves from Russian energy weapons.”

The European Union on Monday did agree to ban most imports of Russian oil. The ban is effective on Russian oil that comes in tankers, which allows E.U. members who get oil via pipelines from Russia to continue to purchase it.

Zelensky concluded his Monday address with condolences to the family and colleagues of French journalist Frédéric Leclerc-Imhoff, who was killed by shelling Monday in the Luhansk region.

Leclerc-Imhoff, who worked for French channel BFM TV, was the 32nd member of the media to be killed in Ukraine since its invasion three months ago.

Source: TEST FEED1

Hutchinson raises minimum purchase age, 'AR-15-style weapons' for 'conversation' in gun reform negotiations

Republican Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson expressed his willingness for a “conversation” on raising the minimum age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21 and “AR-15-style weapons” amid fresh talks on gun reform following a deadly mass shooting in Texas last week.

Hutchinson told CNN’s John Berman on Tuesday that he supported an ongoing bipartisan dialogue between a group of U.S. senators to potentially draft new gun control legislation. Hutchinson said one area the bipartisan congressional group should look at is “the AR-15-style weapons,” and whether the minimum age to purchase one should be raised.

“You have to at least have a conversation about that,” said Hutchinson, a stalwart defender of the Second Amendment.

The Arkansas governor is one of a growing number of Republicans who are expressing a willingness for some gun reform after the tragedy in Texas.

On Sunday, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said he was a “strong defender of the Second Amendment” but that he was “getting sick of seeing the mass shootings” and was open to an assault weapons ban. Rep. Chris Jacobs (R-N.Y.) also signaled an interest in a ban last week.

Some Republicans are still hesitant to enact tougher reform laws, but the age limit to purchase an assault rifle has become a ground for a potential compromise. Only six states have raised the minimum purchase age for a long gun from 18 to 21: Florida, Washington, Vermont, California, Illinois and Hawaii., according to the Giffords Law Center.

Authorities say the mass shooter in Texas purchased a DDM4 V7, an AR-15-style rifle, from a gun store just days after his 18th birthday, which he then used to kill 19 children and two adults in the deadliest elementary school shooting since Sandy Hook in 2012. The alleged gunman who opened fire at a grocery market in Buffalo, New York, was also 18 when he fired a semiautomatic weapon and killed 10 people.

A bipartisan group of senators began meeting last week after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY.) greenlighted the discussion and appointed Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) to lead them for the GOP.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who has passionately advocated for gun reform after the Sandy Hook shooting in his home state, is leading the discussions between about 10 senators.

On Monday, Murphy tweeted that he has “been on the phone today w Republican and Democratic Senators trying to find the common denominator on a gun violence bill.”

“Senator [Majority Leader Charles] Schumer has given us just over a week to find a compromise. This time, failure cannot be an option,” Murphy wrote.

The bipartisan congressional group is meeting Tuesday via a Zoom call to try and reach an agreement on gun legislation, with senators possibly looking at compromising on expanding background checks and red flag laws.

Republicans are still pushing for more mental health support and other ways to combat mass shootings other than gun control, a talking point raised by Hutchinson on Tuesday. The Arkansas governor explained gun control reform is “tough” because it can be difficult to assess what laws actually work to stop gun violence.

“The challenge with the gun safety discussion is what makes a difference?” he asked “It’s hard to come up with a solution.”

Source: TEST FEED1

A ‘moderate’ Democrat isn’t code for ‘coward’

Something has to change, right? Change is on the minds of millions of Americans as we grapple with the racially motivated mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo and the evolving story from Uvalde, Texas, where 19 children and two teachers were killed by a gunman at Robb Elementary School while police officers stood in the school hallway, waiting to breach the classroom.

If the past continues to be our prologue, nothing will change. It didn’t after mass shootings at Columbine High School, Sandy Hook Elementary School, a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, a music festival in Las Vegas, or the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. Why would it be different now?

I’m not holding my breath to see if Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) sentiment that “this time feels different” — the same sentiment he expressed regarding gun laws reform after the Parkland shooting, for what it’s worth — is borne out. My expectations are so low that anything, even the smallest move toward a society that suffers from less gun violence, would be a thrill.

However, against the backdrop of an entrenched and immovable Republican Party that clings to a tired, misguided Second Amendment-rhetoric with the strength of the Vulcan death grip, a glimmer that Democrats might be the politicians Americans want in these trying times is appearing.

I’m not naïve. All signs have pointed to a red wave in the November midterms for months. President Biden’s approval rating continues to plummet regularly. Depending on the poll, Republicans hold anywhere from a 2- to 6-point lead on the general ballot. Over 70 percent of Americans think the country is on the wrong track. And the GOP leads by 15 percent on the question of which party is better equipped to handle the economy, the number one issue to over 50 percent of Americans.

What gives Democrats some hope is that it appears that the way politicians respond to tragedies matters to people. On top of that, it seems that incursions on our rights — which the leaked draft Supreme Court opinion on Roe v. Wade represents to many of us — also factors into how Americans may make their decisions come November. The GOP holds an advantage but that doesn’t mean all voters are happy about supporting Republicans. In fact, considering the responses to these very real domestic crises, the opposite of gun restriction policy that more than 90 percent of Americans support, many voters may be primed to look for Democrats to win these rights back. 

But Democrats are throwing up their own obstacles. Recent electoral results and findings from Democratic focus groups show that Democratic voters want a fighter, as opposed to a bipartisan dealmaker, to represent them. That explains Lt. Gov. John Fetterman’s primary win in Pennsylvania over Congressman Conor Lamb, who ran a relatively bland campaign that emphasized electability above all else.

That said, there’s an inherent contradiction that if you’re a moderate politician you can’t be a fighter. The November battles will be won by execution and strength of conviction. In a country where the substance of Democratic ideas is actually quite agreeable to a majority of people, Democrats are facing a style issue, not necessarily one of issues of substance.

Establishment Democrats are the ones who are the heart of the party, owning the most popular positions on critical issues such as health care, taxes and climate change. And they’ve accomplished the most. They just have to “get loud” about it and match progressives’ enthusiasm for the issues that Americans care about.

Some areas where moderates are showing signs that they can match progressive fervor include:

Gun control: The time for patience is over. A man confronted Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in a Houston restaurant after his appearance at the NRA convention: “Why did you come here to the convention? Why, when 19 children died?” he asked. That intensity was — and should be — matched by Democratic politicians. Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke said to Gov. Greg Abbott: “You are doing nothing. You are offering up nothing. You said this was not predictable. This was totally predictable when you choose not to do anything.” And Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, where one of the most egregious school shootings happened, openly mused about whether Republicans would be moved to action if they “saw what a kid looked like after, you know, 12 or 15 bullets went through their body.” Murphy’s unbridled emotion in interviews and floor speeches sets the standard.

Abortion access: There’s a reason Republicans have been focused on the leak of the Supreme Court’s apparent abortion decision and not its potential impact: It’s a loser for them. Recent polling by Pew Research found that 61 percent of those surveyed believe abortion should be legal in most or all cases, while 37 percent say it should be illegal. A more moderate position for Democrats on abortion — in which they emphasize commonsense terminology such as “safe, legal and rare” and “choice” and avoid conversations about third-term abortions — is a winning position. This is especially true in light of no-exception legislation in at least 11 states and Oklahoma’s governor just signing a bill that bans abortion after “fertilization.” Abortion will never supplant kitchen-table issues as that which is most important to voters, but railing against this authoritarian grab by Republicans — and the challenges it could cause for American women — is a position of strength for Democrats.

Student debt cancellation: This has been a hugely divisive issue between moderate and progressive Democrats, but the stigmatization that moderates have been complacent is a complete miss. Sure, they don’t want to wipe out all debt, a view that mirrors that of most 18- to 29-year-olds, but the recently announced White House bill would erase all debt for a third of borrowers and halve it for another 20 percent — roughly $230 billion in total, notes journalist James Surowiecki. You wouldn’t know that if all you saw was a tweet by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) saying, “$10K means tested forgiveness is just enough to anger the people against it *and* the people who need forgiveness the most.” How absurd. The facts are on the establishment’s side — they should amplify them with the same passion that progressives bring to the issue.  

The economy: The economic landscape continues to pose difficulties and Democrats must stop ceding the issue. That doesn’t mean defending all Democratic policy. To the contrary, acknowledging people’s challenges and connecting through shared experiences would reap tremendous benefits. Defending the American Rescue Plan Act while also acknowledging that big-spending bills have contributed to inflation is a path forward. Prioritize issues such as gas prices and the cost of living, as well as access to health care, broadband and business development. Republicans’ messaging strategy is to criticize Democrats, not to offer their own positive plan. Democrats need to get more aggressive in their attacks on Republican non-policymaking, à la Beto O’Rourke.

There’s no good reason that progressives should have the monopoly on emotional politicking. Moderate Democrats care just as much as they do about gun violence, climate change, abortion rights, and other issues that matter to the middle class. They’ve just got to show it. Let’s get loud. 

Jessica Tarlov is head of research at Bustle Digital Group and a Fox News contributor. She earned her Ph.D. at the London School of Economics in political science. Follow her on Twitter @JessicaTarlov.

Source: TEST FEED1

Is Turkey the new geostrategic center of gravity?

The United States and China are the two largest global economies. The U.S. and Russia are the only two global nuclear superpowers. Yet Turkey, because of geography and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hat trick of stupendously disastrous decisions, may be more influential than all three for the time being.

Putin’s dastardly, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has exposed the Russian army’s incompetence; led to what seems to be an expansion of NATO, precisely what he did not want; and precipitated a global food crisis for as many as 1 billion people. 

But Turkey must agree to the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO as required by the Washington Treaty’s stipulation of unanimity. So far, Turkey has raised strong objections to both entrants based on alleged support or recognition of the PKK — the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which Turkey has designated a terrorist organization.

The 1936 Montreux Convention limits Black Sea access of non-riparian warships (that is, warships not belonging to states bordering on this body of water) to duration, tonnage and armaments. If a humanitarian sealift through the Dardanelles is assembled to transport vitally needed agricultural products in Odessa for global distribution to quell potential starvation and requires naval escorts, the sole enforcer is Turkey to allow or deny transit of warships. 

While Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is prickly, failing to agree to the new entrants would strike a devastating blow to NATO, more so than France’s withdrawal from the military side of the alliance in 1966 under Charles de Gaulle. Putin is well aware of this situation. Doubtlessly, he will be doing his utmost to convince Erdogan to deny entry.

About some form of naval transport to ferry wheat and other agricultural products from Odessa, the obstacles are immense. Russia would only agree with a quid pro quo, such as lifting sanctions. The approaches to Odessa are mined. Ukraine would have to agree to sweeping a safe route in and out of port. And a United Nations resolution would necessarily come from the General Assembly as Russia would veto any motion in the Security Council.

Others have argued that NATO warships may be required if forcible entry were needed. But that would confront Russian naval, air and missile forces and could lead to escalation and even a war at sea. Most of Russia’s Black Sea surface fleet is old. But its Kilo class diesel submarines are formidable. Given the nature of acoustics in the Black Sea, detection would be difficult. And Russian Kalibr and other missiles have proven effective. NATO would need air cover that, because of basing, requires substantial air tanking support.

Should Turkey’s position harden about admitting Finland and Sweden or allowing NATO or third-party warships entry to the Black Sea, few good options exist. Could an abstention, as opposed to a negative vote, on NATO expansion be stretched to allow a 29-0 vote to suffice as unanimous? Probably not. And Turkey would still have to approve treaty changes.

The Montreux Convention is a historical artifact long past its sell-by date. Interestingly, of the four original signatories to the convention, including Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania, the USSR no longer exists. Neither did the newer states of Georgia and Ukraine exist then. But it remains in force. Altering it is very unlikely as Turkey has a commanding role given the geography with the Bosporus and Dardanelles dividing the country.

About the food shortage, this could be a powerful diplomatic tool to be used against Russia. Consigning hundreds of millions to starvation is indeed a war crime. But Russia will blame Ukraine and the West for the shortages, shedding any responsibility. Whether that allegation, however outrageous, will be accepted or not by the affected regions and populations remains to be seen. In large part, U.S. and NATO diplomacy and messaging will be vital to exerting further leverage on Russia to end the war.

Another important conclusion is likely to be dismissed.  The world remains interdependent, interconnected and thus hugely vulnerable to the new MAD of massive attacks of disruption. Ironically, the war in Ukraine reinforces these vulnerabilities.

In addition to the inexcusable human costs imposed by the war in Ukraine, devastating that country and killing many tens of thousands so far, NATO’s cohesion is potentially at risk. Worse, starvation looms for a significant slice of humanity. These scenarios are not new. What is new is that they are more numerous and possibly more destructive in a MAD age.

And as with COVID-19, the world was unprepared. Will we learn?

Harlan Ullman, Ph.D, is senior adviser at Washington, D.C.’s Atlantic Council and the primary author of “shock and awe.” His latest book is, “The Fifth Horseman and the New MAD: How Massive Attacks of Disruption Became the Looming Existential Danger to a Divided Nation and that World at Large.” Follow him on Twitter @harlankullman.

Source: TEST FEED1

Americans' already low economic confidence drops: Gallup

Americans’ confidence in the economy has plummeted to a new low, hitting likely the lowest confidence since the end of the Great Recession in early 2009, according to a new Gallup poll released on Tuesday.

Gallup’s Economic Confidence Index (ECI) measured -45 in May which is down from -39 in each of the past two months. 

The index is a summary of Americans’ ratings of current economic conditions and whether the economy is getting better or worse on a theoretical scale of +100 to -100. It takes into account the net of excellent and good versus poor responses

In April, 20 percent of Americans rated the economy positively and 42 percent said it was poor, a net of -22. The net dropped even lower this month to a net of -32.

The lowest ECI was recorded in 2008 at -72 during the Great Recession.

Additionally, only 14 percent of respondents rated economic conditions as either “excellent” or “good,” while 46 percent rated them as “poor.” Another 39 percent rated them as “only fair.”

As for hopes for a better economy in the near future, only 20 percent of Americans say the economy is getting better while 77 percent say it is getting worse.

When asked about the most important problem facing the U.S., 19 percent said the poor government or leadership, while 18 percent said it was the high cost of living. or inflation Twelve percent cited the economy in general.

The poll was conducted from May 2-22 and surveyed 1,007 registered voters. The margin of error was plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Source: TEST FEED1

Press: For God’s sake, this time must be different

This is a different kind of column, in several ways.

It’s not just from me. It’s from the families of 19 fourth-graders murdered in Uvalde, Texas. And it’s from the parents and grandparents of every little boy and girl in America. 

It’s not addressed to all readers of The Hill. It’s addressed only to members of the United States Senate. Especially to Republican senators, who have consistently voted against any sensible gun safety legislation. And to Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), who has repeatedly invoked the filibuster to prevent such legislation from even being debated on the Senate floor. 

And it’s not just an opinion. It’s a fervent plea: For God’s sake, senators, make it different this time. Don’t let those 19 kids gunned down in Texas be buried and forgotten. Don’t let their families be shattered without taking action to lessen the chance that other families suffer the same pain. 

We’re not naive. We realize, based on our history of school shootings, chances that any action will be taken in response to the Uvalde massacre are slim. Nothing happened after 13 people were killed at Columbine High School in April 1999; after 32 were gunned down at Virginia Tech in April 2007; not even after 20 first graders, 4 teachers, the principal and a school psychologist were shot and killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the parents of those kids came to Washington, begging senators to act. 

And nothing happened in February 2018 after 13 students were killed at Stoneman Douglas High School and surviving students rallied 200,000 people to Washington in a “March for our Lives,” demanding action on gun control. 

Still, we believe Uvalde could be and must be different. After all, that’s who we are as Americans. We see something wrong, we fix it. It’s unimaginable that we would have suffered the dreadful terrorist attack of Sept. 11 without responding in full force as a nation. Equally unimaginable that we would have just remained on the sidelines and watched Russia invade Ukraine without leaping to Ukraine’s aid. We didn’t turn a blind eye to those horrific events, and we must not turn a blind eye to this one, either. 

Especially not when there are measures that can be taken which will make schools safer and protect our children, without in any way undermining what many believe is the sanctity of the Second Amendment. Starting with raising the legal age at which a person can legally purchase an AR-15 or any other assault weapon.  

The gunmen in both Uvalde and the supermarket shooting in Buffalo were 18. Which should come as no surprise. As Nicholas Kristof reported in the New York Times, 18 to 20-year olds make up 4 percent of the population, but 17 percent of those who commit murder. If you’re not old enough to buy a beer, you’re not old enough to buy an assault rifle. 

And why not universal background checks? You’re not going to get in political trouble with that one, senators. Ninety-percent of Americans support them. A majority also support so-called “red flag laws,” allowing guns to be removed from people suffering a mental-health crisis or involved in a domestic dispute.  

These may be three small steps, senators. But they’re do-able. They all have popular support. And their passage would at least show that the Senate’s no longer indifferent to the slaughter of innocent children. 

Everybody tells us, there’s no hope the Senate will act. But please prove them wrong. For God’s sake, this time, do something!    

Press is host of “The Bill Press Pod.” He is the author of “From the Left: A Life in the Crossfire.”  

Source: TEST FEED1