Again.

On Sunday morning, as peaceful worshipers gathered together in a Sikh house of worship near Milwaukee, another mass shooting happened in the United States. For the second time in two weeks, there was another act of domestic terrorism - and for fourth time in the last four months, mothers, fathers, siblings and friends had to mourn the death of loved ones, while others recovered.

Anyone who thinks the attack in Oak Creek, Wisconsin or the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado or the cafe shooting in Seattle, or the other 58 mass murders carried out by firearms in the United States since 1982 could not have had their body counts reduced or eliminated is either a fool or an idiot.

"All of us recognize that these kinds of terrible, tragic events are happening with too much regularity for us not to do some soul searching to examine additional ways that we can reduce violence," President Obama said on Monday. So that is what we are doing today - starting with the terminally stupid defense that the Second Amendment always and forever allows Americans unrestricted rights to guns.

Every right, from those explicitly written in the U.S. Constitution, to the unwritten "Laws of Nature" referred to in the Declaration of Independence, has a corresponding responsibility in our world. Basic logic says that if a person or a society cannot handle any one of those responsibilities, they should also not be allowed to exercise those rights.

Yet even in the face of basic logic, one of the largest lobbying organizations in the world, the National Rifle Association, continues to pour millions into its twisted idea that all Americans should have the right to carry virtually any type of gun, anywhere, at any time, with virtually no legal responsibility.

Gun regulation groups, and those aligned with the NRA, can site statistics from their respective positions until both sides are nearly breathless. Arguing with those who have become so fused to their ideology as the core members of either group is like arguing with flat-Earth fanatics. They are adamant that their Earth is flat, that there be monsters out there beyond the horizon, and it is hopeless to argue anything different with them.

Hopeless, that is, unless the statistics and proof comes from their own people. For gun-loving Americans, for example, that means statistics from a pollster from their own side, like well-known conservative pollster Frank Luntz.

Which is why we find it intersting that in a recent poll by Luntz, American gun owners overwhelmingly agreed with those on the other side of the traditional pro/anti gun regulation line.

Which means there ARE things that can be done to lessen the body count of episodes like those we've continue to witness, through what Luntz termed as common-sense gun control.

These proposed controls include everything from requiring criminal background checks on ALL gun owners and gun shop employees, to mandating that gun-owners tell the police when their weapon is stolen, to restricting permits (or in some cases, ownership) to those Americans who have not committed violent misdemeanors, domestic violence, or who have a history of mental illness. Many gun owners would even be fine with restoring major portions of the Assault Weapons Ban.

Such common sense laws would have likely prevented the Oak Creek shooter from easily obtaining a gun. Such laws would have made things more difficult - if not impossible - for the shooter in Colorado too. Yet our lawmakers still offer words, with no actions every time another mass shooting happens. That is no longer acceptable.

If owning a gun in our nation is to continue be a right, then it must logically correspond to both an individual and a national responsibility. If we cannot handle the responsibility - by passing common sense laws and regulating ourselves - then we should not be allowed to wield that right.

Details, Distraction & Duct Tape

Over the weekend, if you were like many Americans, you were likely watching many great stories from the Olympics. American Michael Phelps became the most decorated Olympian ever, and the Williams sisters won gold on the tennis court. The U.S. women's team volleyball and beach volleyball teams also continued their gold medal runs. South African Oscar Pistorius - a double amputee - also made history, running amongst the so-called able-bodied for the first time in Olympic history.

On a more somber note, you may have also seen the grim story coming from Milwaukee, where yet another multiple shooting claimed the lives of seven people, outside a Sikh house of worship.

What we bet most Americans didn't catch was the latest whining and name-calling distraction techniques by members of the Republican Party on the Sunday talking heads shows. What was missing from their attempt at distraction was barely a word of details about either Mitt Romney's tax plan, or his tax records.

It's almost as though Mitt's been muzzled by his handlers - though we think it's more Mitt muzzling himself.

The truth about why we're not hearing more details from Mitt Romney on his tax ideas is actually quite simple: If Romney told the American people the truth about his tax plan, he'd have to admit there is no mathematical way to make it work.

The Tax Policy Center released a tested model that proved Mitt's math doesn't work - and showed all kinds of other problems too.

The best quick rundown of Romney's problems with his plan to change our tax structure came from Ezra Klein last week. As Ezra noted, the Romney campaign's claims that the tax policy center figures are biased are provably false. Further, as multiple reliable sources have confirmed, Romney's plan to give the massive kinds of tax breaks to the rich is mathematically impossible. It can't be achieved without also raising taxes on everyone, gutting government services for all but the richest Americans, or a combination of both.

That means either Mr. Romney and his team are lying, or they are incapable of the mathematical skill needed to properly manage the economy.

If you assume that not every one of Romney's advisors is an idiot, then you must accept that Mitt is lying about his tax plan and he knows it. Which leads us to Mitt's own tax problem, and his fight with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Romney and the Republicans continue to say that Reid's most recent comments - that Reid has a source that can confirm Romney did not pay taxes for multiple years over a decade - are mere lies. What the terrified and disrespectful Republicans who keep attacking Romney continue to avoid is an uncomfortable truth. Dana Bash, a CNN reporter with a fairly solid reputation, also says she has an unnamed source who can confirm Reid's assertion about Romney. While we anxiously await further information from those sources, there is a faster way to solve this dispute.

As many on the left, and even a significant number on the right have agreed, if Mr. Romney wanted the focus off his own personal tax history, all he would have to do is follow the example set by his father, and release his tax returns - which would end the debate. That would immediately prove if Romney is the liar his other actions make it appear that he is, or whether Harry Reid is indeed the liar that Romney and Company claim him to be.

For now, however, Mitt's mouth - and his records - remain sealed.

Friday Funday: Run For The Hills

In many places around the country, when the month of August begins, the thought of running as fast as possible for the nearest batch of cooler temperatures blasts to the top of the collective wishlist.

In other words, a vacation.

In our minds, however, a vacation is something that should be well-earned after a long period of hard work.

That's an opinion that since January 2011, has been almost completely missing in the Republican-led House of Representatives. In fact, right now there is a tsunami of major issues that still faces Congress: the Farm Bill, a drought aid bill, the upcoming budget crisis (a crisis Congress created themselves) with biting sequester penalties, the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts, the Postal Service crisis (that Congress created), and more. Most of these bills deal with taxes and budgets, and so their resolution MUST begin in the House - meaning that the House more than the Senate controls the Congressional calendar.

Yet, the far-right wing Republican "leaders" did what they've done nearly every time they've been faced with a tough decision since they got back into power.

They left Washington, D.C. on vacation for five weeks - but voted against leaving on vacation before they beat feet for home.

That may confuse a whole lot of people.

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution says "Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days...." So if the full Congress wants a real vacation, simple majorities in each house must vote for a vacation.

For once, however, old-fashioned, non-Tea Party Republicans - the kind who used to care more about working for their constituents than appearing on Fox or Rush Limbaugh - decided to join with Democrats, and stand up for what's right. So the House voted 150-265 to not adjoin for a technical recess.

That wasn't the only bipartisanship seen in the increasingly partisan U.S. House this week.

A bi-partisan coalition led by Iowa Democratic Congressman Bruce Braley tried all week to convince their fellow lawmakers to pass a decent Farm Bill before the August recess. Even though their initial efforts failed, the bipartisan group is going to continue to use the arcane rules of the House to try and force through an upgraded Farm Bill, even in the middle of a month of "Pro Forma" sessions.

That's right; a group of bipartisan Congresspersons are going to keep working through the break, to try and get done what their cowardly leaders don't have the guts to do: the jobs the American people sent them to Washington to do.

If that's not a reason to celebrate, we don't know what is.

Good luck to those lawmakers who left DC for a vacation.
We'll remember you in November.