Hot MedFax

And where are we really?  Background checks didn't pass, the Democratic senators who voted against the proposed legislaton are still in Congress, and still against it, and the NRA is still whooping it up in victory. There have been a few signs of hope -- with NYC Mayor Bloomberg taking out ads against those running for office who are pro-gun, and his most controversial stand yet, urging big donors to deny funds to those four senators who joined the Republicans in killing the background check legislation, even if their seats may now fall to Republicans. You have to admire his drive -- though sitting on billions of dollars helps. And Democrats, according to The New York Times today, are also renewing their push for gun measures.  Jonathan Weisman writes that Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, though, is cautioning that he won't accept any bill that is weaker than the one voted on in April. But has anything really changed?  Hero teacher Victoria Soto's sisters were on mo...

I can't believe it.  I just can't believe it.  In the end, the gun lobby won.  I don't know what kind of America I'm living in anymore.  I thought for sure that now, we had them.  That finally this country was coming around to realizing we're no longer the Wild West and need assault rifles to shoot deer and "protect our homes." Oh, gun control opponents were very self-righteous with their "criminals do not submit to background checks," or "expanded background checks," as GOP Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa said piously, The New York Times reported this morning.  Why not just admit it, Charlie?  You submit to the piles of money the NRA throws your way.  I feel like we live in a land governed by whores.  Who will do anything, anything, for money.  When one of the Newtown fathers said, "Our hearts are broken," and Obama reached out and grabbed his shoulder, my rage turned to tears.  How could this unspeakable tragedy n...

Sadly, more and more schools are buying into Wayne LaPierre's insanity -- oops, I meant, logic -- that schools need armed guards to be safe. As Justin Green writes in The Daily Beast, some schools in very rural areas are too far away for the police to respond quickly.  So in Missouri, for one, they've turned to installing armed guards in these schools. And the townspeople love it. Excuse me, but I don't see how having any kind of weapon in a school is a good thing.  I believe the Columbine killers used their armed guard's gun against him, did they not?  Closer to home, and Newtown, some schools have indeed voted for people to patrol their halls with guns.  Enfield, Conn., is one, which is pretty funny because this is a town with less than 45,000 residents, where the population has only gone up .1% since 2000 and which is located in the suburbs,  rolling hills, to be exact. A Florida mother has handed out a $12,000 check for armed guards in her daugh...

A scary headline in my local newspaper last week read, "Blumenthal, NRA boss find common ground."  Scary because Democratic Sentator Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut's former attorney general known for challenging illegal drug company marketing practices, cracking down on health insurance companies for fraudulent policies, and others, now can agree with Wayne LaPierre, whose response to Sandy Hook was arm the schools? Phew!  That's a run-on sentence. But what is most frightening to me is that Blumenthal, who has campaigned so agressively for the common man, now believes we're probably not going any further than background checks -- important as they may be -- because the NRA will go along with that.  Forget banning assault weapons.  Registering buyers at gun shows, and everywhere.  Illegal gun prosecutions -- which LaPierre bet Blumenthal will not rise even after the Newtown massacre. Is the best we can hope for, background checks?  I'm not den...

That President Obama feels the need to have photos taken of him skeet shooting?  And that gun zealots have to smugly note that it's "only" skeet shooting, or that the photo was faked?  Isn't what we're talking about here not sport guns vs. assault rifles, but lives?  That's what's getting lost in all this nonsense.  And who cares if Obama shoots skeets (and what the hell are skeets, anyway?) once a week or once a lifetime? Does that make him less a man, or leader?  I guess to the NRA, it does, who, according to Darlene Superville, is "scoffing" at his claim. And why is Obama going along with this?  Why does he feel the need to shoot, or defend his right not to shoot?  Is that really what we want this all to be about? http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/white-house-releases-photo-obama-firing-gun-18385919 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/02/nra-obama-skeet-shooting_n_2608177.html