Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Mass shooting. Inaction. Repeat.

Protest against gun violence

People take part in a Moms Demand Action Gun Violence Rally on June 8.

Nathan Howard/Getty Images

Weichlein is the CEO of FMC: The Former Members of Congress Association.

As we are dealing yet again with the horror of our children falling victim to a mass murderer, let’s keep our focus squarely on what unites us, because within hours of the news breaking, the political and media voices that benefit from keeping us divided were already out in full force.

Regardless of political persuasion, whether we are gun owners, who we voted for in the last presidential election, and what our ZIP code is – we all agree that America is in a gut-wrenching and heartbreaking pattern of school shootings, followed by outrage, followed by inaction. There isn’t one rational American who didn’t react to the news from Uvalde, Texas, with despair, followed by anger that yet again a madman could spread carnage and end young lives in an instant. These days we are not united by much but, surely, we are united by anguish over innocent lives lost and fear for our own children and grandchildren. How is common grief not enough for a call to action and a demand of Congress to overcome differences in search for solutions?


There’s no party label when it comes to gut-wrenching sorrow over 19 murdered fourth graders and two heroic teachers trying to shield them. Parents and grandparents, regardless of where they are politically, hugged their little ones tighter upon hearing the dreadful news. Republicans and Democrats alike expressed their grief and anger that yet another madman ripped a community apart. But almost as tragically, that’s where the common ground ends. Like so many other aspects of life in today’s America, we’re letting the extremists dictate policy and we’re allowing those who benefit from keeping us divided control the narrative. How, after Newtown and Parkland and now Uvalde, have we not moved even an inch closer to coming together, across the political aisle, and committed ourselves to finding compromise and solutions that most assuredly will save innocent lives in the future? Because fear-mongering voices from both extremes of the political spectrum won’t let the rest of us unite behind common sense answers.

The numbers vary depending on when polls are conducted, but a majority of Americans support making changes to our gun laws. Yes, stark differences between the parties appear immediately when pollsters narrow their questions to specific initiatives such as banning assault weapons or closing certain loopholes but, overall, the majority of Americans want to at least try to break this cycle of mayhem and madness. A 2021 Pew Research Center poll found broad support when it comes to red flag measures and background checks, for example. And that number includes a large percentage of gun owners and NRA members.

That support in a poll, however, does not translate into empowering Congress to actually act. Instead of turning grief into honest and productive back-and-forth on a crisis that literally terrorizes parents and children, we have settled on a tragically predictable chain of events: mass shooting ... thoughts and prayers ... politicizing the dialogue and demonizing your political opponent ... inaction ... repeat. And the pundits on the far right and the far left punish any member of Congress who is willing to give an inch in order to take a mile. You get punished by whatever cable news channel your constituents tune into. And, more importantly, you get punished by a candidate further to your left or to your right during the next primary, where traditionally only the more radical voters bother to show up, thus giving us more rigidly doctrine-adhering candidates heading into a general election for gerrymandered districts.

We adhere to the all-or-nothing crowd on either the left or the right, who view even the beginning of seeking compromise as a betrayal of dogma. As little children were still fighting for their lives in Texas hospitals, politicians on both sides of the aisle were already feeding their Twitter following the same old talking points, with only the dates and location needing to be updated.

Is there really no middle ground between protecting Second Amendment rights and preventing someone too young or too unstable from purchasing one or more assault weapons? Can we not strengthen our system of background checks while still licensing responsible and law-abiding gun owners? Is it really impossible to put a system in place that allows enough time for red flags to be thoroughly investigated and processed? Can’t we agree that this is not a crisis of either mental health or the vast availability of mass casualty weapons, but rather a crisis of the two combined?

The question is yet again: Will this be the moment that we finally come together as a society and demand better from our elected officials on both sides of the aisle? Will this be the moment when politics is defined by courage, leadership, and a commitment to truly work toward a solution rather than offend distraught parents again and again with the usual playbook of distraction and meaningless talking points? Tragically, I don’t think it is. It wasn’t after Newtown. It wasn’t after Parkland.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. Mass shooting ... thoughts and prayers ... politicizing the dialogue and demonizing your political opponent ... inaction ... Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

Read More

Is Bombing Iran Deja Vu All Over Again?

The B-2 "Spirit" Stealth Bomber flys over the 136th Rose Parade Presented By Honda on Jan. 1, 2025, in Pasadena, California. (Jerod Harris/Getty Images/TNS)

Jerod Harris/Getty Images/TNS)

Is Bombing Iran Deja Vu All Over Again?

After a short and successful war with Iraq, President George H.W. Bush claimed in 1991 that “the ghosts of Vietnam have been laid to rest beneath the sands of the Arabian desert.” Bush was referring to what was commonly called the “Vietnam syndrome.” The idea was that the Vietnam War had so scarred the American psyche that we forever lost confidence in American power.

The elder President Bush was partially right. The first Iraq war was certainly popular. And his successor, President Clinton, used American power — in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere — with the general approval of the media and the public.

Keep ReadingShow less
Conspiratorial Thinking Isn’t Growing–Its Consequences Are
a close up of a typewriter with the word conspiracy on it

Conspiratorial Thinking Isn’t Growing–Its Consequences Are

The Comet Ping Pong Pizzagate shooting, the plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and a man’s livestreamed beheading of his father last year were all fueled by conspiracy theories. But while the headlines suggest that conspiratorial thinking is on the rise, this is not the case. Research points to no increase in conspiratorial thinking. Still, to a more dangerous reality: the conspiracies taking hold and being amplified by political ideologues are increasingly correlated with violence against particular groups. Fortunately, promising new research points to actions we can take to reduce conspiratorial thinking in communities across the US.

Some journalists claim that this is “a golden age of conspiracy theories,” and the public agrees. As of 2022, 59% of Americans think that people are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories today than 25 years ago, and 73% of Americans think conspiracy theories are “out of control.” Most blame this perceived increase on the role of social media and the internet.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illness, Presidents, and Confidantes

U.S. President Joe Biden speaks at the Economic Club of Washington, DC September 19, 2024 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Win McNamee

Illness, Presidents, and Confidantes

Ever since the reality of President Biden’s mental and physical decline has been made public, ink is being spent, bemoaning that the nation was at risk because the President was not fit to make crucial decisions twenty-four hours a day.

Isn’t it foolish that, in a constitutional republic with clear separation and interdependence of powers, we should rely on one human being to make a decision at three in the morning that could have grievous consequences for the whole nation and the world? Are we under the illusion that we must and can elect an all-wise, always-on, energizer-bunny, superhero?

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

Trump's reliance on inflammatory, and often dehumanizing, language is not an unfortunate quirk—it’s a deliberate tactic.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

From ‘Obliteration’ to ‘Enemies Within’: Trump’s Language Echoes Authoritarianism

When President Trump declared that the U.S. strikes “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, it wasn’t just a policy claim—it was an exercise in narrative control. Predictably, his assertion was met with both support and skepticism. Yet more than a comment on military efficacy, the statement falls into a broader pattern that underscores how Trump uses language not just to communicate but to dominate.

Alongside top officials like CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump claimed the strikes set Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by years. However, conflicting intelligence assessments tell a more nuanced story. A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency report concluded that while infrastructure was damaged and entrances sealed, core components such as centrifuges remained largely intact. Iran had already relocated much of its enriched uranium. The International Atomic Energy Agency echoed that damage was reparable.

Keep ReadingShow less