Sniper Country Duty Roster

Hey all, I just wanted to say Happy New Year, Be a Safe as Possible, and most of all:

Thank you very much, for the interesting conversations, information sharing, and also, for being a great group of somewhat like-minded individuals. I always enjoy coming here, and gleaning the pearls of information.

Thank you all for your service. Past, Present, and Future.

And 'Lito, just for you mang, GIVE 'EM HELL, AND CHANGE TOO! We're all here cheering you on buddy. And this place ain't the same without ya.

It sure is nice to see the regulars, and also some of the plankowners posting here. I will say though, that it would be nice if a few more of those who've moved on would check back in once in a while. There are still those, whom are missed. Maybe this year, eh?

God Bless You All,

Sean T.
Winterpeg, Manisnowba, Canada - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 00:53:33 (ZULU)

To all,

A happy and peaceful New Year.

Mark

Mark Taylor
Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 03:04:19 (ZULU)

Click.

Lakota Sioux nation severs treaties with U.S., declares their own country.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 03:06:33 (ZULU)

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

May all things, be they Allies, adversaries, or objects, always do what you want, need, and expect them to.

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 03:17:27 (ZULU)

Happy New Year from the Atlantic time zone!

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 04:09:04 (ZULU)

Happy New Year, y'all! I hope everyone has a happy, healthy one. Just made my last New Year's patrol on the SAPD. Kinda sad....lots of fires made by dumbass fireworks users.....SAFD was jumping through hoops all day. One crew in a brush truck took a shortcut through a supermarket parking lot to beat the horrible traffic on Marbach road. As they hit the freeway access road, they kinda wondered about the thumping noises from the front of the truck. It was a wheelchair. Yup. Owner of the wheelchair was still in the parking lot. She won't need it, anymore. Sad, sad.

Finger....I'll see you after I go on vacation. I've got three weeks to get my stuff in order before class starts on 1 Feb.

Charles S. Hunt
San Antonio, Texas, USA - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 05:25:13 (ZULU)

Happy New Year Everybody!!!

Sure hope '08 is a whole lot better than '07.

UnPat

UnPat
Wi, USA - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 05:47:04 (ZULU)

Out to 300ish yds something like .30cal/180gr/2700fps will do. Use a premium bullet. If you jump shoot bull elk or - I would suppose - moose and you don't fancy having your animal run off and get tagged by someone else, you may want to consider one of the .300 or .338 mags and a heavier bullet. Those rigs will also let you extend the range considerably.

Someone is bound to tell me that placement trumps power. Wind, rain, dark, fleeting target, etc often make placement problematic.

Despite what you read in magizines, with bigger bullets, placement becomes less critical.

My $0.02. Shoot whatever you want.

CDC'
Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 06:03:04 (ZULU)

Hawgs,

Happy New Year to each and every one of you. 2007 was great and 2008 will be even better.

Cheers,

Doc

Doc Holloway
The chilly Ozark boonies, MO, USA - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 07:09:55 (ZULU)

Gents,

Happy New Years... enjoy the story...

Morgue

RETARDED GRANDPARENTS

(This was actually reported by a teacher)

After Christmas, a teacher asked her young pupils how they spent their holiday away from school. One child wrote the following:

We always used to spend the holidays with Grandma and Grandpa. They used to live in a big brick house but Grandpa got retarded and they moved to Florida . Now they live in a tin box and have rocks painted green to look like grass. They ride around on their bicycles and wear name tags because they don't know who they are anymore. They go to a building called a wrecked center, but they must have got it fixed because it is all okay now, they do exercises there, but they don't do them very well. There is a swimming pool too, but they all jump up and down in it with hats on. At their gate, there is a doll house with a little old man sitt ing in it. He watches all day so nobody can escape. Sometimes they sneak out, and go cruising in their golf carts. Nobody there cooks, they just eat out. And, they eat the same thing every night - early birds. Some of the people can't get out past the man in the doll house. The ones who do get out, bring food back to the wrecked center for pot luck. My Grandma says that Grandpa worked all his life to earn his retardment and says I should work hard so I can be retarded someday too. When I earn my retardment, I want to be the man in the doll house. Then I will let people out, so they can visit their grandchildren.

PRICELESS . . .

One final thought... PETA? click my name...

Mourge
Overseas, - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 07:38:22 (ZULU)

Click.

Hell, I'd fall for this one.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 07:48:20 (ZULU)

Click.

How many five year olds could you take in a fight. I got 34.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 09:56:55 (ZULU)

Interesting link on entrapment Travis

Hmmm.

If it is legal to sunbathe without a top and the woman is being employed by the police, you could probably take pictures of her and sell them as 'news photos' without breaking any laws. The news article could reference the organization she is employed by... heck, some video of her expressing opinions on current events would probably be even more news worthy (nationally) and likely change the police department's policy on hiring topless women pretty quick.

One great headline would be "Police Chief hires topless women to patrol park". Maybe find some dude with a rainbow on his car to sue the department for gender discrimination in employment <g>.

medicjim
Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 14:44:58 (ZULU)

Happy New Year.

Jerry

Jerry
Annapolis, Maryland, USA - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 16:38:27 (ZULU)

I think the topless thing was over the top for a PD to do. We were always given the guidance that if we plant the seed of the crime in the person's head, that is entrapment. If the person is already predisposed to commit a crime, entrapment is probably not an issue.

We used to use female Police officers to bust Johns who approached them. We would let the John tell her what he wanted and what he would pay. No entrapment.

Side note: Don't use hot women. The Johns smell the set-up. There are not that many good looking street hookers.

S/F

Finger

Jim Reifinger
Pearsall, TX, USA - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 16:54:44 (ZULU)

Morgue/Mourge Got a question you might know the answer to. Is the 42 available in the black stock like the 22. By the way, which is the correct spelling of the name? I've seen it both ways on your posts, lol

Topless PD If she asked him to show her his WEEWEE, isn't he just following police orders? lol I'm with Jim on the entrapment. That's the way they work it around here. UCO may iniate contact and ask if he wants some company but she isn't allowed to bring up the money for action. The john has to do that. She can bait him into it through various ways, like "what do you want" but he has to make the offer of "money for sex" for the arrest, otherwise the judges around here throw out the cases. They fill the waggons enough without entrapment. After watching tapes with one of my bud's, some of these idiots ore sooo stupid. The UCO's don't even have to iniate contact. The guys just drive up and out right make offers without even asking if the women are working girls or not. I wonder how many regular female pedestrians get offending offers every day around that area. There are quite a few unfortunate lower income women that have to walk through that area to get to the bus stop to go to work.

Happy New Year again.

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, - Tuesday, January 1, 2008, at 18:43:59 (ZULU)

What would be the point of sunbathing,topless or otherwise under a SHADE TREE?..... Most sunbathers lay in the SUN.The firefighter deserves the ticket for being that stupid.

UnPat

UnPat
Wi, USA - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 00:14:32 (ZULU)

Jeff,

The gun comes in Green or black though as far as I know the Folding stock is only Available in green. I have seen it both as Sako TRG-42 and TRG 42 I think it just depends on who is selling it to how it gets labeled.

Edited to add...

If... you are asking about my name... LOL... as was pointed out and suggested as a possibility, its either or both... I am not that picky.

Morgue

Edited to add...

An elderly man in North Carolina had owned a large farm for several years. He had a large pond in the back, fixed up really nice, along with some picnic tables, horseshoe courts, and some apple and peach trees. The pond was properly shaped and fixed up for swimming when it was built.

One evening the old farmer decided to go down to the pond, as he hadn't been there for a while, and look it over. He grabbed a five gallon bucket to bring back some fruit.

As he neared the pond, he heard voices shouting and laughing with glee. When he came closer, he realized it was a bunch of young women skinny-dipping in his pond. He made the women aware of his presence and they all went to the deep end to shield themselves.

One of the women shouted to him, "We're not coming out until you leave!"

The old man frowned and replied, "I didn't come down here to watch you ladies swim naked or make you get out of the pond naked." Holding the bucket up he said, "I'm here to feed the alligator."

Moral of the story: Old men may move slow but can still think fast.

Mourge
Overseas, - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 00:47:52 (ZULU)

Wisconsin Shooters,Got this in an e mail from the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Assoc......

UnPat

Dear fellow gun owner:

A very important bill has been quietly making its way through the

legislature. In order for it to become law, you need to contact your

legislators.

Assembly Bill AB581, authored by Representative Scott Gunderson

(R-Waterford), would prohibit the state or municipalities from confiscating guns or ammunition during declared states of emergency.

You no doubt recall the events after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, when law-abiding citizens had their guns forcibly taken from them.

Under current law, the governor, as well as other officials, have the

authority to exercise emergency powers. AB581 would prohibit the state or municipalities from using such emergency powers to restrict the possession,sale, transfer, transport, storage, display or use of firearms or ammunition.

While Wisconsin is not in a hurricane zone, our state does experience

natural disasters. We have also experienced riots. It is at times such as these when having a firearm for home defense is of paramount importance.

AB581 passed the Assembly by an overwhelming vote of 84 to 13, with two members absent. The next step for the bill is a vote in the state Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker (D-Weston) has stated that he favors the bill, and hopes that it will pass in the Senate. Governor Doyle has not said whether he would sign the bill or not. His office has merely indicated that he would review it.

We cannot allow the anti-gun members of the legislature to water down this bill with amendments. And the bill must pass the Senate with such an overwhelming majority that Governor Doyle will have no choice but to sign it.

Following the gun confiscations in New Orleans, over a dozen states passed laws similar to AB581. If you value your right to keep and bear arms, please take a few minutes to write or call your state senator and ask that he or she support this bill.

UnPat
Wi, USA - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 04:02:01 (ZULU)

Click. Ruger is making a 10/22 pistol called the "Charger". Comes with Harris type bipod. I don't know that I "need" one, but I can sure as hell think of a lot of applications for one. Especially considering the plethora of 10/22 accessories on the market.

Would seem perfect for sitting on the back deck with a glass of iced tea and popping squirrels at my liesure while I barbecue a brisket.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 11:19:27 (ZULU)

Morgue Is the nonfolding stock adjustable? I'm don't need the ability to fold but I'd like the adjustable cheek and pull. I think all the pictures I've seen were of the nonfolding but were adjustable. And yes lol I was wondering about your name, but if both will apply you can type faster and not have to worry about typo's. My fingers get dyslexic sometimes when in a hurry. lol Good joke too.

Travis Thanks for that Charger link. I may have to get one of 'em to replace the Mark III I swapped to get my daughters .308. It'll be a good compliment to the Encore .308 pistol I've got. I love strange/exotic looking guns. Have you heard what the price will be?

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, US of A - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 15:31:44 (ZULU)

Jeff,

The TRG is extremely adjustable IMHO. the folding stock is just a little easier. You can get spacers that allow you to adjust the cheek weld and the but pad is adjustable vertically and can cant 15 degrees horizontally either way.

You can adjust everything with a allen key that comes with the TRG when you buy it.

on another note I received a response back from BOHICA ARMS and delivery is going to be around march...

I need to stop playing online during my down time... I keep finding toys that I want... and they more I see them the more i want 1...

anyways gents...

Hope the new year is going well for ya'll

Morgue

Mourge
Overseas, - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 15:56:49 (ZULU)

Jeff,

Just send me $10,000, and I'll see that you get one.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 16:38:07 (ZULU)

Think you're tough? Well, read this, which ranks right up there with ferret leggin'. (Do a Google search on that, if you don't know what ferret leggin' is.)

Click on my name for the link.

Lindy
The Northern Occupied Territories of Mexico, - Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 22:51:47 (ZULU)

The various games the Scots come up with are a demonstration of what happens when folks have too much whisky and free time available.

Examples: the Highland Games-throwing trees, stones, the blacksmiths hammer and various other objects for distance.

Curling- sliding stones around on ice.

The just mentioned 'ba game.

Golf.

I'm sure there's others. JR, kin ye nae chime in laddie?

WR Moore
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 01:10:01 (ZULU)

SCRUM...hehehe, any of you other techies out there get the joke. Boy would I love to participate in a spontaneous incarnation of the real game during some work days...I'd pay serious money just for one half hour round, best man left standing...I sure do miss being 18.

medicjim
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 01:49:29 (ZULU)

Ah, if I were only still invinceable! (Or could walk normally)

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 02:47:06 (ZULU)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm

USAToday, the Mcpaper fit for a birdcage, is polling the second ammendment: Does it give indiviudals the right to own guns?

Click my name, choose yes, then submit. Takes five seconds (unless you dial up). I just hit it, it was 97% yes, 2% no, and 1% undecided.

Joe M
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 05:16:08 (ZULU)

Voted-wonder if they'll publish the results regardless of outcome.

DC fired their lead attorney in Heller.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080103/METRO/739378878/1001

WR Moore
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 06:21:15 (ZULU)

Gents,

Voted. I am curious how changing lawyers is going to help their cause...

Joe M, PM inbound.

Jeff, Looks like the pistol is running almost 400...

l8r gents, Watch your six...

Morgue

Mourge
Overseas, - Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 09:28:36 (ZULU)

Joe,

Poll seems to be closed.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution does not give the individual the right to own guns. This is a silly question for the dimwit press to ask. Does the First Amendment give the public the right to free speech...absolutely NOT.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution does ENUMERATE an existing right of the individual to keep and bear firearms (one they are granted when "created", not given by some piece of paper).....any fool with a basic education can read it themselves <g>

The only people that have a problem understanding the Second Amendment are those that want to remove rights from "We the people", so that they might dominate the masses with force.

"We the People" will ultimately need to shoot the people that want to remove the rights of "We the people"...I think that is what the founding fathers intended when they placed the Second right after the First...

Click on my name for a survey of which candidate best matches your pespectives on issues... I'm between Ron Paul and Guliani...!!!?

medicjim
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 14:10:38 (ZULU)

MedicJim: I became numb to trying to explain that the bill of rights give nothing---these and other rights are given by God and no government had a thing to do with it. The bill of rights serves to prevent the government from forgetting that fact...That argument falls on seriously deaf ears. I figure that these pollsters wouldn't truly understand a "no" vote either.

It does serve to show the dangers of "polling data" for decision makers' like the clintoons. Example: If someone asks me "is the country on the right track?" I'd say no. Many would read that as a ding on Bush (current) policies. But my reason would be that the country is heading toward socialist policies--and that be bad. But that sentiment would NOT appear in the moronic analysis. Heheh, maybe there is a "live by the poll, die by the poll" lesson coming up for those who swear by them. Youz all know how I feel about leadership by popularity contest---crock o' $hit.

Joe M
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 16:48:30 (ZULU)

Ref: 2nd Ammendment

Some years ago my daughter was in class when the teacher mentioned that the 2nd Ammendment was outdated and no longer applicable.

My little princess put up her hand and said, "My Dad says that the 2nd Ammendment is the most important part of the Constitution. He says that its the Control-Alt-Delete function for the Constitution."

The teacher was left speachless and moved on to another subject.

I'm sure I'm on a list somewhere.

Happy New Year you bumz.

Kevin R. Mussack
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 16:58:49 (ZULU)

One of the responsibilities outlined by the founding fathers was that of being good stewards of our own governance.

Kevin / Joe - I would be honored to be on that list with you.

medicjim
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 18:10:27 (ZULU)

Keeping with the theme of the constitution, give Dr. Ron Paul a thorough look.

If you are like I was, his stance on the war on terror is a major turn-off. For me, my libertarian streak was tempered by their stance on drugs at first, then by Paul's seemingly crazy disregard for the GWOT.

But, like all things--they aren't what they seem on the surface. By being challenged by one of our own--I looked into these issues deeply. If we do not want the government in our bedrooms or bank accounts, email inboxes or as a third party to phone calls---why is OK for them to be in our medicine cabinets? This goes to the law applying to the interaction of two people---and that I do not care if you choose to imbibe on your time as you should not care if I wear a seatbelt; Liberty...a concept that requires much thought. It is not easy--for it implies a large degree of responsibility. You see, if I like to shoot guns, I do owe it to other not to do so in their direction, as an example. My liberties end at the tip of my nose, yours begin at the tip of yours. The space between is why we established a government. Unfortunately, this government decided that the space between our ears was fair game along the way. My personal bottom line onthe war on drugs boiled down to this: If we set aside the myriad of restrictions (often conflicted)--I would not go out and become a junkie tomorrow. Nor should I care if you do or not. The "reason" we justify our concern over others' actions always leads to "costs on society." OK, so why should I also be paying for anyone's extracurricular activities or healthcare too? Socialism, in any form, has too many strings attached because once i pay your way, I want more say over my investment. It is the same for government. So, pick your most hated government intrusion in your life, and connect the dots back to why it is regulated. Chances are near certain to parrallel the very reasons cited for drug policy. Or, do something that civics used to be all about: Go forward from the constitution itself, and try to justify that which you despise in the government's control over your behavior. If you find it, it is likely an interaction of two people---if you cannot, it is just another example of infringed liberty.

Ron Paul understands this better than anyone running, period. In fact, it is not even close. His ideas about Iraq did not come from ignorance of global situations--but from a thorough understanding of what is constitutionally permitted--and what is not.

I'll be damned if I have found it yet---but prior to the invasion, I posted a caution on our imminent invasion of Iraq---Ken, if you can "tip" me on how to search, I'd like to find that post---but the bottom line was that it would be a mistake in the large run for the reasons we fret about now (Iran's influence in the region, the devil we knew opposed this versus the "mob rules" that would be sympathetic to the east and not the west once we did the deed). It seems to have played out (though had we whacked Sadr in 04, we could have slowed this down).

Anyway, Ron Paul's "sound bites" on the subject are designed by the media to make him, and thus his followers, look like loons. Once "crazy" is attached, dismissal follows.

I found myself in the ranks of dismissive anti-Pauls until very, very recently.

You all know me to be a hawk on terror. Yet I also find common ground with Dr. Paul on this, and all other issues.

What I am trying to say is this:

If you are unsatisfied with the repubs running currently; or

Paul's seemingly bizarre positions on foriegn policy led you to tune him out--

Do a little research!

It took me weeks to find all that I could---most of it is editorial crap telling me how stupid I am for even trying. But, a few places here and there gave him a fair hearing, and expanded his message past the "sound bite." It was what he says beyond the 10-seconds that made me re-assess his viability.

yes, it was a PITA to get the deeper story--but, hey! We are talking about a presidential election, and the fate of this nation's future direction (possibly its survival in its intended form). It is worth the trouble to evaluate each and every candidate thoroughly. Too few bother...do not dismiss this guy on the basis of what the media tells you to think about him alone. Dismiss him because you tried to validate him instead.

This is not too far off topic, since Paul is the only candidate that knows exactly why the second ammendment is in the bill of rights. Andy's Dad says it best (I like that Ctrl-Alt-Del quote a lot:))!

And finally, I blame Bravo for my new-found political leanings! But to be fair, all he did was walk me thru my own beliefs in a subtle way...Dr Paul was not part of the discussions until I tried to apply what I thought to the slate of candidates. His negatives (fed to me by the media) were reduced upon closer inspection to " did not look at it that way" revelations--as in, the constitutional aspect of what we do. If you look deep enough, you will find a hawk in Paul that makes Bush look like a comparative wimp. He looks at self defense as a Clauswitzian ball buster: Incur the wrath of the United States, and get the whole measure. I can live with that.

Viability? Screw that....take the long view. Barry Goldwater seemed like a loser until Reagan harnessed the movement---and, that had some significant and far reaching impact on our nation after all. Paul's grass-roots success is at least changing the tone of his coverage ever so slowly even now. Maybe, with enough people actually studying what he is saying, a new movement will launch over the coming years. The ingredients are in place for one; better it be the ballot box for change than the cartridge box, eh?

Joe M
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 20:04:19 (ZULU)

Ron Paul apparently has a video on a charity site, where if you watch the video, money is donated to the chosen charity.. Pretty neat concept.

cut and paste or click my name.

http://www.whatkindofworlddoyouwant.com/

medicjim
Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 20:29:18 (ZULU)

No surprise here. I'm closest to McCain, but furthest from Obama. I think I'm actually furthest from Hillary, but that she's telling folks what they want to hear, and she's got a totally different agenda for if she takes office.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 22:35:49 (ZULU)

Soapbox country:

The overall consequences of the "War on Drugs" is a net loss to western society, IMHO. Why should it be ultimately any more successful than Prohibition? Do we have rival breweries shooting up each other's delivery drivers today? Then there is the wholesale invitation for governments to invade our privacy and rights as part of this war, and then the whole issue of the militarization of law enforcement. Without the enormous profits inherent in such a massive illegal industry, we wouldn't have any where the issues with gangs and violence we're experiencing today.

Interesting documentary on the topic is:

http://www.nfb.ca/webextension/damage-done/home.php

"Damage Done:The Drug War Odyssey"

ob disclaimer: I have zero past or present interest in trendy chemical amusement aids.

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 23:15:05 (ZULU)

"And finally, I blame Bravo"

Man, if I had a new M14 every time I heard that! But thanks for the kind words - and they're more kind than anything else I believe.

On the Second Amendment - here's a new question for you. Since the

Founding Fathers agreed, and documented, that the Bill of Rights

enumerated rights given to every man by God:

How can a man take from another man what God has given? Trick question, because he can't. Man can't take what God has given, thus the word "inalienable" - and the usage of it in this context.

But a man can certainly give away what God has given him. If God dropped a hundred pound bag of hundred dollar bills on a man - and he then gave it away for no good reason - we'd call that man an idiot (after all, if God wanted the other people to have the money, He'd have dropped it on them instead, eh?). If God made a new Lexus appear (complete with title) in a man's driveway one morning, and he gave it away for no good reason, we'd call him an idiot, right? If not an idiot, certainly not a proper steward of what he has been entrusted with, eh?

But if we give away our inalienable rights in the name of 'compromise' or 'social welfare' - as our inalienable rights are far more valuable than a hundred pound sack of hundred dollar bills or a new Lexus, shouldn't we be considered idiots? Surely.

So when someone - like the democrats, VPC, Bradys, the NRA, or HCI -

claims that we aren't being realistic because we won't 'compromise' away our Rights and Liberties, the correct response is "it would be

completely irresponsible of me to give away that which God has bestowed on me - I intend to be a richeous steward of what has been entrusted to me!"

Or, for my agnostic bretheren, the comment would be more akin to "you've gone a step too far, this is mine and is in no way yours. Leave me alone or I'll fit you with concrete galoshes and you'll sleep with the fish tonight".

Long live Ron Paul, and his second attempt at the whitehouse (some of us remember when he ran before - on the Libertarian ticket, against the president that increased taxes, implemented gun control, and pushed forth government programs and losses of civil rights - against the republican winner).

Rod - words mean things, so let's be clear. There is no such thing as a "war on drugs". What there is, would be a "war on amirikans with drugs". I say amirikans 'cause any true American would love liberty first - and fight closet (or medicine cabinet) fasicm where ever it rears its ugly head. The funny thing is, it was General Washington's personal surgeon that warned that if rights to personal care weren't included in the Bill of Rights, the government would certainly - eventually - choose to exert usurped unconstitutional authority over such matters.

Travis, since you said something about agreeing somewhat with McCain (without being publicly sorry about the situation) here's an edited version of something I felt compelled to post earlier today (elsewhere).

Mitt says the right things now. Just like Roooody and Fred – and to a large extent, McCain. The question isn’t “who says the right things”, it’s “who will do the best job”. For that, we need to go long beyond what politicos (especially politicos) have to say.

The reason we execute murderers isn’t because we’re looking for some kind of ‘justice’. Nor ‘revenge’. Nor is it really an effective means of deterring crime – those predisposed to commit murder aren’t going to necessarily be deterred by potential consequences when in an emotionally excited state (in the ‘heat of the moment’). We execute murderers because of one simple and fundamental truth: the best predictor of future actions is the record of historical actions. I have yet to hear of a person walking into a police HQ and spontaneously confessing all the details of how he committed a murder – people’s mouths lie, but their actions exceedingly rarely do. If a fellow has shown up at place YYY every Wednesday at 12:15 to buy a ZZZ, for years without fail, then the odds that he’ll show up at YYY at 12:15 on the coming Wednesday is something taken as an article of faith. Or at least wagered heavily upon.

Now we get to the hard part. Investigate deeply – on your own, don’t trust the lying media for anything – the histories of the candidates. All of the candidates. The best predictor of what they’ll do in the whitehouse is what they did in congress or the governors mansion. When you do, I believe you won’t back Mitt any longer. You said, “Our common goal, if I dare state it, is to get someone in the Whitehouse who will say no to gun bans”.

Specifically, we all know the governor has to sign a bill (or have his veto overridden) in order for it to become state law. A signature. No written statements, just a signature. Governors have, however, used “signing statements” for various reasons – they’re not required in the least however. Look up what Mitt added to the law he passed (the one that made the assault weapon ban permanent in his state) as his personal signing statement on it. If that doesn’t turn your opinion around, I don’t know what will.

I can’t say that he’s no friend to the Second Amendment, or that he hasn’t gone through some major life-altering change that has made him (now) a friend of the Second Amendment. What I can say though is that his history has me ‘extremely dubious’. That history would literally outlaw the rifles you build. What would it take to convince me that he’s changed his opinion?

Let’s go one easier – I might be swayed (not convinced, but potentially swayed) if he were to give some reason for the change. For instance, if he had been mugged, and said that he changed his views on gun control right then, that has the ring of truth. Many liberals have figured out what’s what when on the wrong side of the situation. But he hasn’t made any type of statement on what caused his new-found faith in the Second Amendment. What would truly convince me was a longstanding proven history of working against the people that oppose us (HCI, the Bradys, the NRA, etc). Flatly Mitt doesn’t have that history. Neither does Roooody, regardless of what he is currently saying.

McCain? He said we ‘little people’ had far too much freedom under the first amendment, and worked diligently to change that with the McCain-Feingold act (A.K.A. the incumbent protection act). Fred worked on the same bill – now ‘law’ – and the letter to Fred from Feingold says that without Fred’s help the bill never would have made it through. Question: if a candidate (or candidates as the would be the current case) works diligently to effectively and significantly reduce your First Amendment rights, how can one expect that he won’t do the same for the Second Amendment? Not to mention that McCain has publicly spoken against firearms like you manufacture, and Fred has indicated that he’s a “moderate” on this issue as well – fully understanding that “moderate” means “willing to negotiate away” just as George H. Bush did.

Ron Paul has – as was previously noted – 20 years of bulletproof record on the matter. Mike Huckabee is another candidate with a proven longstanding track record on the Second.

And now on to the “most electable” comment. At this moment, this is completely immaterial. What we have to do is look at which candidate follows closest to our personal positions. Then vote for that individual in the primaries. That’s literally all that matters. It’s my stance that you’ll see far, far too many people ‘voting against hillary’ – it doesn’t matter who has the ( R ) next to their name.

Me personally? If Dr. Paul doesn’t win the primaries, I’ll have a difficult time voting for any republican. Maybe Mike Huckabee if he wins the primaries – maybe. But I can guarantee that if Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee don’t win the primaries, I’ll be voting Libertarian again; I can’t compromise my principles and vote for a socialist.

Only in amirika today can you have a Constitution Party that nobody votes for ‘because they aren’t electable’. Only to people that don’t agree with the Constitution and the concept of having a Constitutional government.

But this election is somewhat unique. To expound on what I mentioned earlier, this election it is literally more important to vote in the primaries than it is in the general election. Far too many people with room temperature IQs are going to vote for any opposition to the democrats. Likewise, the democrats are going to vote for anyone with a ( D ) by their name. Make sure that Dr. Paul has the ( R ) beside his name, and take the presidency. Conversely, if Roooooody – or Mitt, McCain, or Fred - has the ( R ) beside his name, look for the democratic candidate to win. You see, Libertarians were growing steadily, but the last two elections the Libertarian votes have been very low. So why is that? Because many Libertarians – I’d go as far as saying most – chose to compromise their principles and vote for G.W. Bush, hedging their bet against John Kerry or Al Gore in the extremely close elections. But after 8 years of “the new Republican party”, more of the same in the likes of Rooooody, McCain, Fred, or Mitt isn’t palatable any longer. Libertarians are going to (as one article put it) “spit on the republican party” and let them sink. After all, who can blame them? They voted for someone who has done more to permanently destroy civil liberties than any president in the last several decades.

Ronald Reagan said that he didn’t leave the democrat party, they left him. People such as myself used to be republicans, until the republican party left us. Or to be more specific, the ‘new republican party’ moved far left from us. I for one won’t be party or even complicit in voting a socialist into office – it doesn’t matter to me if the socialist is socialist ( D ) or socialist ( R ).

Bravo
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 01:44:28 (ZULU)

retrospective news story of Canadian troops in combat in A'stan

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/afghanistan/story.html?id=209510

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Friday, January 4, 2008, at 02:28:34 (ZULU)

03:00 insomnia

Bravo: I'm voting for the "least bad" candidate. Right now, my top four issues are the Jihad, illegal immigration, the Constitution and the economy. All the Dem candidates are ridiculous on all four issues. The Repubs are less so. My state's primary comes late. The nominee will be chosen by then. Whoever it is, I'm voting against his Democrat opponent.

I don't know Paul's stance on illegal immigration, but his stance on the Jihad is naive beyond belief.

CDC'
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 10:58:37 (ZULU)

Joe,

Email in bound....

CDC,

I don't know if you are apposed to natural remedies. I have found that benesom which has 1mg of melatonin works great for me when I am having trouble sleeping. It doesn't leave me groggy in the morning ( i don't think) and works almost as well as things like ambian for me. Just something to think about. It beats tossing and turning as well as some of the other options out there and is completely natural.

Mourge
Overseas, - Friday, January 4, 2008, at 14:59:22 (ZULU)

Bravo......Bravo! I'd have to agree with CDC's assessment that Ron's stance on the GWOT is, well, the term he used was "naive", but I'd have to say "stupid". Other than that, I've been more of a Libertarian than Republican for years. I campained for Nixon in '68, as a kid. Now I'm beginning to believe that none of the (D) or (R) candidates is worth a bucket of warm spit. And, I'm beginning to be increasingly suspicious of any person that wants to be in a position of authority over my entire life. But.....like sausage, politics is a messy thing. I'll hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils before I'll throw it away and allow the most evil to be installed. Wow....did Hillary take a punch in the ovaries, or what, last night?

Charles S. Hunt
San Antonio, Texas, USA - Friday, January 4, 2008, at 15:00:46 (ZULU)

Bravo,

Please check your email. :8-p

Duman
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 17:01:10 (ZULU)

CDC, Chuck, it’s like I asked before: which do you believe would be easier, to educate Dr. Paul on jihadists or educate mcstain, romney, fred, and rooooody on the Constitution? CDC gave four big issues, and Dr. Paul has a proven track record on 3.5 of them (he voted to invade Afghanistan in retaliation for 9/11, but not Iraq – he’s huge on “if we’re going to make war, go over and destroy everything, then come home – NO NATION BUILDING” so I gave him half a point on jihadism). Compare that to the others, and you’ve got at the best 2, with more getting a 0 or 1.

The economy? Nobody has used the Fed as a campaigning issue since Woodrow Wilson until now – and the other republicrats aren’t touching that one with a 10 foot tall bulletproof Libertarian. So much so that it’s getting real attention (thanks to the plummeting dollar and looming recession) and some companies raided. Unlike the other republicrats, his stance on illegal immigration hasn’t changed / waffled / converted.

You hit it on the head – the demopublican candidates are bad on all 4 issues – but I’d go as far as saying that mcstain, fred, romney, and rooooody are equally as bad. Because they’re demopublican candidates too, it’s just that somehow they got a (R) beside their name – which just goes to show you just how morally bankrupt the republicrat party has to be in order to endorse people that advocate positions directly contrary to the stated party platform.

And lest anyone think that I’m actively advocating Mike Huckabee, let me set the record straight on him. I think he’s a good man, and has some good ideas, but he’s no Jeffersonian. Neither is he all about the Constitution and limiting the federal (or more precisely – defacto national -) government to authorities delegated in the Constitution. But he’s the best of the Hamiltonians, which I readily admit. On my point scale, Ron Paul hits a 95%, Mike Huckabee runs a good 60%, Fred and Eduards are tied at 15%, and mitt, roooody (or as I call him “hillary in a different dress”), mccain, obama, and hitlary all tied at 4%.

That’s right, on a philosophical basis, I can’t tell rooooody from hitlary, obama from mitt. Except for one little trivial point: when demopublicans get ‘gun control measures’ passed, sometimes they sunset – when republicrats get ‘gun control measures’ passed they’re typically permanent. That’s a good reason to elect a republicrat, eh?

But you’re right, your state is after the new and improved “super-duper Tuesday”. Let’s hope that things go well – the way I see it, literally the direction of the nation lies in the balance. Look into Dr. Paul’s history (note, that’s history that doesn’t change, unlike the other republicrat candidates the MSM wants you to believe are ‘front runners’) on immigration, you’ll be pleased. His stance on the jihadists, as Joe mentioned, needs to be investigated in order to be understood. It’s that of a realist. Like Joe mentioned, you have to search the reasons out, not just go by the sound bites.

Completely unrelated: you’re to blame for this... Ordered a swamp rat that is due to be delivered today. Waited on them to build it since you turned me on to them about what, a year ago? Got the chopper, even though the blade is an inch longer than I’d prefer. I’ll mess with it tonight, and hopefully take down a tree or something silly just to do a FAST evaluation – if it’s as good as I expect it to be (I trust what you have to say), I’ll order the boy a duplicate right after. He won’t get it for another 4 or 5 years though ;-)

Duman - will do. I spent the New Years south (where it was warm and not all white!) of here, got back in time to get to work yesterday. I'll catch up soon LOL!

Bravo
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 18:35:34 (ZULU)

Gents,

Time to come out of defilade and make a few comments.

Like most I've been watching the Ohio voting with casual interest. Why casual interest? Because neither party has anyone worth voting for at this time.

What we are getting are the same sound bytes, hollow promises, and posturing that we've been getting for years. I dislike the Democratic candidates and find it utterly mind boggling that they can vote for a man that won't salute a flag or say the pledge of allegiance. Think he's going to take being sworn in seriously? It's a good indicator of how low that party has sunk. So, Obama in first, with Edwards/Hillary in 2nd and 3rd place. Wouldn't like to have been within three grid squares of the Hillary camp last night. Bet there was a lot of screaming and lamp throwing. Right now I'd say with 90 % certainty that Hillary is NOT going to be the Democratic candidate for president. People are finally seeing her for what she is...damaged goods. Obama is "new" and that sells, but make no mistake he's a business as usual type and we'll see the same thing we would see with other democratic candidates.

Republicans? Same problem as with the demo's. No real candidates to choose from. Huckabee? No way. McCain? I respect the man for his sacrifices, but think he left something behind in the Hanoi Hilton. Guliani and the rest are all just politicians who are business as usual, too. Nothing new under the sun.

Both parties are giving lip service to illegal alien problem, close the border, health care, and you name it. The same promises we heard two years ago from the parties that we needed to do something about the illegal problem.

To date, neither party has done ANYTHING positive about closing the borders, the economy, or getting America back on it's feet as a "producer" of goods. We make little in this country and it will come back to haunt us. Case in point. Looked at a Gerber knife set yesterday...made in China. It stayed on the shelf.

War on terrorism and war in general: We are holding our own, but only because huge amounts of money are being spent(guess who's pockets it's going into). We are not being allowed to win which is sad bacause we can, easily. Take the F-ing gloves off.

In all of this it is ACTION that will have a long term effect. Not just money.

If there were a candidate that would get us on track, restore national pride, and make America whole again I'd vote for them...even if it were Hillary Clinton! All we have is a bunch of limp dishrags who think that watering down what America stands for and giving away the rest is the right thing to do...again, both parties are responsible.

A independent as president? I like Ron Paul, but don't think he's the answer. At least that would shake up the status quo a bit, though.

Personally, I think well see Paul as the independent candidate(who can't win, again), can't see who the demo candidate will be at this point, and think that Bloomberg will "buy" the presidency as the Republican candidate. He's staying clear of the current pissing contest and I think hell ride in about March and commit huge sums of money and resources. He will buy the Republican nomination the same way I think he can buy the presidency. That's good news/bad news. On one hand he has a reputation for being a "my way or the highway" businessman/leader which won't play well with the electorate. The other side is he has enough money, power, and connections to not be swayed by partisan politics. I think that anyone that gets in his way is going to be VERY sorry. I don't like him, his style, or the fact that he want to shape America into a vision of what he wants/thinks it should be. Which means once again the voter/populace is left out in the cold.

The problem is not who is sitting in the White House, folks. It's the perversion of our political system by those who have wealth and power and care less about what the real American(you and I) wants.

My advice is to keep you powder dry, because the way this is going there is only one way it's going to get back on track...

Damn, told myself I wasn't going to rant again. Better get back to the meds...;-)

Semper Fi,

Sir Wes

P.S. Time to light the candles around my copy of "Unintended Consequences".

Wes Howe
Salem, OR, USA - Friday, January 4, 2008, at 20:28:47 (ZULU)

Bravo,

You bought a "Swamp Rat" ?!? You dawg! I've been eyeing them on/off for a couple of years, since CDC' pointed that direction. Please take before/after photos of the knife (and the tree). :8-p

Duman
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 20:31:52 (ZULU)

Sir Wes, my friend, really look into Ron Paul. First off, he’s not running on the Libertarian ticket like he did against George Bush (not GWB). He’s running on the republican ticket – which makes sense ‘cause the republican platform actually agrees with his stances (not that the other candidates do).

And that’s EXACTLY what Dr. Paul is all about – restoring America and shaking up the status-quo. On money, don’t discount Paul. On Guy Fawkes day, he pulled in over 4 million – an all time record for one days fundraising of any candidate in history. Until that record was recently smashed – on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Over 6 million contributed in one day – again, to Ron Paul. Both were complete grassroots movements, RP didn’t have anything to do with them. What’s more, a record 40,000 (about, don’t recall the exact number) people donated an average of $102 each – first time political donors. Watch what happens on April 19!

Duman, if I can get the boy motivated for an evening out, I'll get the pics ;-)

Bravo
Friday, January 4, 2008, at 22:15:46 (ZULU)

Sir Wes: Hizz honor quit the grand old party...he is officially now an independant. Now, just prior to the election, he was also a demonrat---the switch was merely a cynical ploy to avoid a primary. Now, do ya thunk anyone outside of NY or LA would ever confuse this guy as a repub??? Naw, if he runs, he pulls the middle--which, believe it or not, helps the right. As it turns out, repub-self-ID polls slightly higher than dems as of this month---for the first time in half a dozen years.

Ronnie's quip on the dem party leaving him inspired me: The republican party did not leave me; I was out-bid by special interests!

Holy shi'ite, the second ammendment lies in the hands of one man: Justice Kennedy. As far as gun ownership goes, the election may be a moot point either way. How's that for irony? A Kennedy deciding the majority on our pet issue....God surely has a sense of humor at times.

Paul pulled 10% in Iowa--with nothing but self-generated grass roots to counter a media bent on marginalizing him with personal attacks and misrepresentations.

I hear Huckster got his win from "evangelicals." Like a church tipped the polls by 9% over a money machine. That is what is all over the papers and airwaves, at least. Me, I wonder if his adoption of the fairtax got him some traction...any candidate that wants to take special interest out of the tax code has my attention, regardless of the vehicle used. I do need to read up on the consumption tax idea. I don't know enough about it yet (economics minor--I wanna know the boring details).

My vote is probably not enough...I'll probably get slightly active at the county level---for Paul.

Rant alert:

Naive? I don't think so...unless you think Clauswitz and Sun Tzu were similarly naive. If you need an example of naive--try this one: It was NOT because of a "fragile" coalition that we left Saddam in power in '91. It was the devil-we-know vs. the likelihood of expanding Iran's influence by empowering a majority against two minorities--one of which that had been recently holding a boot on the throat of the majority. Doesn't take an expert to read those tea leaves. Naive is looking at these same facts on the ground---and invading with the goal of dumping Saddam and establishing a democracy before Christmas. Yeah, no shit---the whole chain up to the Prez thought, for no good reason, that we'd wrap this one right up. This despite his father's hesitation and sound logic for it. That is naive.

What Paul believes is war is all or nothing. As that has been the only profession I have ever known--I have to tip my hat to the guy---go big or stay on the porch. Let's see...where have we seen this before? A-stan...nope; IraqII...again, not hardly; Vietnam? Ha...war on a leash. Korea? Almost, but the advocate got sacked before he usurped the necessary presidential powers (heheh). WWII? Bingo. We beat the shit out of two countries to the point where we altered their cultures beyond recognition before and after. Bushido gave way to business accumen, nazism gave way to pacifism.

Powell was right though---break it; buy it. We're stuck with forcing the issue--or we're going to pay more than we are worth in the aftermath.

This is not as contradictory as it seems with my earlier in-country cheerleading. We had crossed the rubicon, so that debate was over. But my criticism then was we tried to "be nice" in a culture that sees that as weakness. We needed to be assholes---that would have brought respect. Zapping Sadr was but one example of shoulda-coulda. We were on short final to bag his ass, but Bremmer called it off. Fallujah I was another example. Ring the town, and tell the terorists to take charge and have a nice day...WTF?

If Saddam had pissed "President Paul" off (and frogs had wings:)) ---I know that his war just might have ended by Christmas. Naive? Hardly.

It is naive to take US perceptions into other cultures militarily and expect US-styled outcomes. Bush 43 (41 gets a pass for limiting his objectives in Iraq, and fails for Somalia), Clinton, Reagan--all foolishly committed US forces based on "projected social values" onto cultures that have no resemblence to ours whatsoever with limited objectives; like inserting between druze, shi'a and christian militias, inserting into a feudal warzone to feed the masses, Kosovo, Bosnia (what has changed there???). Envision any one of those where we simply pick a side and annihilate the other---problem solved for keeps. But, we do not do that-- why? Because, we had no dog in those fights. We merely wanted to feel good...for now. 241 Marine Oars on Second Force's wall and 25 years later, and Beriut is still off my list for tourism. Tokyo, on the other hand, was just fine 2-3 years after WWII and is a neat place to this day. The only thing that changed by this so-called wise use of force is that children grow up without fathers. Good men we could use in troubled times. Friends were lost. Paul says that we go to war when we decide it is time to re-write another nation's facebook page. None of this "little bit of war, little bit of nice" crap. Pick a side, take a stand--and let slip the dogs of war.

So, Paul's view on use of force is naive? Tell that to Jill Curry or Maria Stack.

I think you all should re-look this thought. I'd say what we think is a "wise use of force" of late is what is truly naive. Paul believes that war is what you do when you want to hear raspy wimpers for mercy--anything short of that is a waste of time, lives and treasure. When you look at every conflict since WWII, where is he wrong? Desert Storm, maybe...but no other qualifies. If we leave Bosnia, what do suppose will happen almost immediately? And, what is the plan and execution going on now to prevent it? Nada. Is Somalia any better off today for the lives of our SOF personnel? Kosovo? Afghanistan...we play a brigade there, and NATO is less than mediocre about conducting combat ops---it is a staus quo situation, and that is one we will lose in a long grind. Iraq was done on a shoestring--a Corps' minus with no viable reserve, on a functioning logistical footprint designed to support one brigade. We asked for an insurgency--then spent a year debating whether we had one as kids died. Yeah---the military pulled a rabbit out of the hat--and we should be proud as hell...but, if we were totally serious---would we have lost the peace afterwards? Maybe, maybe not. But seven armored divisions, the seventh and fifth fleet, 4 light divisions would have changed Syria and Iran's tune; and this altered perception by our enemies would have likely changed the dynamic in the 'stan as well. Pakistan would have looked at that as serious shit, and not as an extended superpower too busy to bother them---we say jump, and they take Wazirastan. They can't be sure what we'll do next, so they do what we ask. That is what total war does; it makes your damned point. If you don't have sufficient reason to make that point --why would you bother going to "half-war" or "quarter-war" to make a "half-point" or "quarter point?"

In other words--the Constitution mentions defense...not refereing domestic squabbles in the balkans. Or spanking a dictator for telling the UN to piss up a rope. If war is needed, it is needed---go change some one's thought processes or just bury his ass.

Who is naive in this game really? After doing nothing but looking at these issues for two solid weeks, I know the answer now. Frankly, it surprised me. I thought this guy was nutz like most of you do at first. Turns out, I was just ignorant of the facts and was fed a line of shit by the main parties thru the media.

In 2003, Iran was the biggest threat to the region where our western economies get most of their oil. In the 80s, it was the same threat--Iran trying to squeeze Hormuz. Since carter the nut farmer sold the shah out, it has been that way. Today, we fret over their growing influence in Iraq, the Stan, and with Oil-rich Russia and Hugo. And we have no strategy whatsoever short of hoping to nuke them first before they try to nuke someone. Bush 41 saw that threat of Iran as bigger than removing Saddam (who was the counterbalanceto this threat). Twelve years later, Iran was still the major threat and in fact, a growing threat---yet we removed Saddam with war-lite? And while we gave them pause, that did not last very long. Nothing changed on the bigger threat side--we just fell into our ethno-centric belief that everyone wants to be us and piled on Saddam. Ha. Right idea, wrong country first, eh? But---this is the definition of "naive policy" in progress.

Summary: Paul believes the military is for killing people and breaking their shit into tiny little pieces. Do this so damned thoroughly that unarmed State weenies and USAID can go in and do the nation building in the ruble among the humbled masses of the losers---losers MUST know tha they lost with no doubts. The military immediately goes home and stays sharp for the next one. Today, we have the military fighting on their right flank, while building power grids on their left---for years and years. If you find Paul to be naive--you bought into the media's portrayal. Let me know how this mind control works out for you...I'm going down fighting--and Paul is the first skirmish for me. His view on war is the first one that is anything but naive. If you think otherwise, youhave not really looked at things critically. Seriously.

Damn...a rant from hell. Sorry about the bandwidth (yet again)

Joe M
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 06:58:24 (ZULU)

OK, Joe, Ron Paul gets another look.

One quibble: you said Desert Storm might be a case of successfull limited war (an aside, not your main point). Not so: DS set the conditions for an inevitable follow-on conflict just as WW1 did. They set different conditions, but both set up conditions that nearly guaranteed further trouble. Once again your (and Paul's?) thesis that only all-out war is beneficial holds true.

That argument has real merit. Read Victor Davis Hanson's "The Western Way of War", and you'll see a similar observation: that the desire for conclusive confrontation destinguishes Western warfare from other traditions, and lies behind much of the West's military dominance. If we abandon that, as we have begun abandoning western culture generally, we'll sink into the ...metric I guess, of the other cultures around the world: endless episodic warfare, never conclusive or really over, and eventual defeat because no one always wins. That's not why I put on the nation's uniform, or what I want my daughter raising her (eventual) kids to live through.

Come to think on it a little further: is that not the pattern for the last half of the last Century? Civil War-peace-WW1-waiting-WW2-peace-Korea-(bloody)truce-VietnamGrenadaPanamaBalkinsSomoliaDesertstormAfghanistanIraqifreedom.... You guys tell me: will it ever stop by our being 'restrained' and 'nice', or do we need to "let them hate us so long as they fear us"? I'd vote for the latter even though I'm one of the guys who'd have to go make them afraid.

I'm definitely Lebertarian-leaning (though the Party has had some really unatractive spokesmen). One point most outside the libertarian camp seem to miss: the compassionate help-must-come-from-government arguments assume that charity is zero-sum, like the same people used to assume about economics. Neither is. When Americans see a need (or opportunity) they self-launch. There's no need for government action: that's a false argument to justify spending monety on voters who'll be grateful (or dependent) at the next election.

As far as Kennedy deciding on my gun rights goes... MOLON LABE.

SSG Mac
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 13:10:39 (ZULU)

WOW...this bar just got real interesting. Ron Paul, nation building is not war, sovereignty vs regional mores, consumption taxes, SCOTUS on the 2nd...and then..

SSG Mac "the compassionate help-must-come-from-government arguments assume that charity is zero-sum, like the same people used to assume about economics".

In Katrina, the government redistributed the people's tax money. All the relief came from institutions already in place in the area....like fire departments, police departments, road departments, ambulance services, local construction and trades...and the State Guard, those that weren't off fighting a foreign war.

It was the same on 9/11, and every other incident that crossed municipal borders that I have ever attended.

The federal government has to mobilize the military to get anything concrete done...it's the only mitigation force they have.

medicjim
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 14:11:39 (ZULU)

You guys wrote sooo much in one day that I think my head will explode if I actually try to read it all. I will add one thing though. One of the first lessons I learned in my American Government class was that the traditional role of the third party was never to win, their basic purpose is to bring up issues that the two main parties were not taking up. One of the big two would see all the backers of the third party and take up their cause to add the third party voters to their side in order to win the final election. If Paul is now a Republican and not a Libertarian then maybe he can do what has been done to the third parties in reverse, and take their good ideas. I'd like to see all the troops come home but that's just not a reality. We are in Astan right now cause we screwed up just 20 years ago by not installing a good puppet. We have to rebuild or the terrorists will do it for us. Being from TN I really wish Fred would DO SOMETHING. He threw his hat in and has laid back ever sence. Maybe all he really wants is a shot at Vice and then to move up in 8. This is MveryHO and in the tradition of Sarge I'm now leaving hide and moving to DHLZ for extraction cause I'm sure there's about to be an intense MOAB bombardment. One for which I haven't studied the candidates enough to defend.

Morgue Thought I'd let you know MidwayUSA has the 338 250grn Scenars on sale for 54.99 this month.

Sir Wes Just got my copy for Christmas and only been reading for 3 days. When I have a chance I can't put it down, but I can see where it's going with Henry Bowman mentally, and seems that it'll be a great fictional but highly plauseable book.

CDC I'm a true Insomniac, won't sleep for days without sleep aids. It started back when I was I college and had "still do have" ADHD. I take Lunesta "cute little green luna moth" that everyone thinks is a butterfly. I've been through the Ambien, Sonata, Chloral Hydrate, and some others. They all work for me but only for a short time. Lunesta has worked for 4 years now. Just make sure to take it or any of the others WHILE IN BED. Otherwise people will be telling you what you did last night before you got into bed. LOL Melatonin works too for most people, especially good if you have a job that doesn't allow ANY drugs. It took me 6 months of doccumented use while not flying to get flight surgons approval before I could take and fly the next day. It's got a half life of about 2 hrs so if you take 1mg and sleep 8hrs it's almost gone when you wake up. I feel energized in the mornings. One wild side affect in addition to the others listed by the commercials, VERY vivid dreams, something I've never had before and after my system getting used to the medication, no longer have. I wish I could get them back. I'm jealous of people that have dreams and can remember them.

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, - Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 15:08:38 (ZULU)

First DC brief filed:

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/petitioners-brief-in-dc-v-heller.pdf

sinister
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 15:38:50 (ZULU)

From page 28 of the document Sinister linked to…

<snip> The second clause “The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” equally addresses the possession and use of weapons in connection with Militia service.<snip>

If we apply this logic to other amendments, it strips virtually all rights enumerated and non-enumerated

9th - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

I hope it doesn’t go this way, but I can see this ruling potentially setting the stage for something very serious.

medicjim
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 16:31:48 (ZULU)

Medicjim,

I was trying to make the point (probably poorly) that the argument some make stating the government has to do charitable things because there's not enough private charity to go around is flawed. Didn't mean to make any distinction between local and federal. My comments were mainly aimed at the social programs that are almost always justified with the 'compassion' argument.

Not sure I understand what you wrote clearly. It's true the Gov. redistributed tax money during the recovery from Katrina, and also true that the in-place institutions (mostly local gov) provided most of the relief. I'd take all that as almost a given for a large disaster. Did you mean the funding for all that had to come from Fed lvl? I'd agree. We have a scaled government system: local-state-federal. They (conceptually) take care of things apropriate to their scale: Local-trash pick-up, State-Road building, Federal-National Defense, etc... I'd say the recovery from a widespread disaster like Katrina would be appropriate for the feds due to the scale of resources required, but the local institutions would have to implement the actual relief because they're the ones in-place.

I don't see any real difference in our positions.

SSG Mac
MOLON LABE, - Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 18:23:09 (ZULU)

Well heck. I didn't mean to kill the discussion entirely.

Hello?... (crickets....)

SSG Mac
MOLON LABE, - Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 23:02:58 (ZULU)

Bill: The status quo of saddam's Iraq, evicted from Kuwait, was the goal based on a realistic view over who--and what--would benefit most from his removal. Looking back, we had our regime change too shortly after the groundpounding. It did not need to set the conditions, again--this goes to Ron Paul's point: We could have turned from maneuver war right into a state dept "rebuilding" in Iraq. basically, give Saddam a bear hug of aid that he could not wiggle away from. Instead, we followed the limited war dictum--we acheived limited objectives, then went on about our lives elsewhere with little thought about what we had just done.

My Kuwaiti friends, one of whom was a young LT at the palace in August of 90, would also beg to differ with you: They got their country back, very few strings attached:)) That generation has esteem for us that cannot be bought or negotiated.

DS was a wash...neither a failure or a success in complete terms.

Jeff: Third parties or renegades from within: Reagan's success followed Goldwater's vision. True effects, if one has long view. Q: Do we have the time remaining to let these changes slowly filter thru?

Remember this: The national response plan is a "reinforcing effort" the feds provide to state agencies (in place responders). Think of FEMA as merely a steroid injection. The state, therefore, owes the plan a modicum of competence. LA failed. Also, consider that the fed now drags money from all citizens, then uses excessive taxed funds as aid to the states to acheive policy concessions--bribes by any other name. 55mph speed limits, 21 year drinking age, etc.

The reason this country worked was the limiting nature of the constitution; which keeps government power local--where neighbors can watch it closely. The slow slide to DC and the neutering of state's voice (17th ammendment) all created conditions. Seriously. what power granted to itself for a "emergency" or "particular" problem has the government ever left alone? RICA was for the mafia--now it is a blase charge for everyone targeted. Ya think that, in the long run, the Patriot act will be reserved for terror suspects? Ha.

Paul ain't bad at all on this point of use-of-force issues...look at each previous act of war (since WWII) in terms of what we got for it, what we wanted, and why we thought we needed it. Then, if there was compelling reasons to play---look at possible outcomes of total war in place of the limited action. Indeed, if something doesn't rise to total war---are we sure we have a compelling reason to half-ass it in the first place? Paul has a very, very good point on this, provided you give a thorough analysis without bias towards "living that history."

Joe M
Saturday, January 5, 2008, at 23:50:29 (ZULU)

Me want short articles about guns!

The posts of the last few days make me long for the days when I was trying to wade through the geneology in the bible. Or, as I call them, the "begats". It's about enough to make you want to eat a bullet or do your own root canal, just to distract yourself.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 00:20:21 (ZULU)

A new - and short - manual from the friendly folks at the Small Wars Journal: FM3-0 Operations - the SAMS Rewrite.

Click on my name for the link. Cheers!

Lindy
The Northern Occupied Territories of Mexico, Texas, U.S.A. - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 02:32:37 (ZULU)

Joe, rostermail on the way (to avoid making Travis's head explode;))

SSG Mac
MOLON LABE, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 02:47:14 (ZULU)

I'm loosing my mind..........

Considering trading into a DSA STG58. Damn bipod is uuuugggllyy but there is some sex appeal to it's sleak lines and curving butt. Plus I've got a hockey load of mags stashed away for special occasions. Anyone have an opinion on them?

Doughlady......

Woman is an ammo eating machine. She's tried all my pistols and now has settled on a Ruger Mark III to get her CC permit with. The girl can cut itty bitty groups in a target now after only 3 nights practicing. She'll move up to more power later but now she's having a blast with 22's. Makes me happy since a brick of 22 don't cost that much.

It's bed time, Bolt out!

Bolt
Bored in........, NC, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 02:51:38 (ZULU)

Sorry Travis, but I'm really enjoying the political debate that's going on here.

I like what Ron Paul stands for and agree with Joe's and Bravo's reasoning. I'm just worried that there'll be a bunch of people like us, that are sick and tired of the way things have been going, that will vote for RP and give the election to the worst of the two evils. I'd love to vote for Paul, but think it would just be helping out the Demopublicans, not to say I'm at all happy with the Republicrats.

Tony Burkes
Alvin, Texas, United States of America - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 03:26:20 (ZULU)

Sorry Travis,

I got to agree with Tony... I am enjoying it hearing about this from people who know aren't media mouths...

Morgue

Mourge
Overseas, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 05:17:39 (ZULU)

Click for a Ron Paul clip. Pay particular attention to the statement he makes at 2:20.

CDC'
Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 05:28:20 (ZULU)

Tony,

I'm not saying, "Okay, enough, shut up.". I was just hoping someone had something new to tell me about guns, or shooting, or hunting.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 06:02:04 (ZULU)

Travis...that's a good thing. Especially since our continued ability to shoot and hunt pretty much depend on the outcome of this and future elections along with the general populations understanding (or lack thereof) of the real purpose of the Constitution. I don't think anyone with two brain cells to rub together and a sense of civic duty can be interested in one without being interested in the other.

Geoff M
WI, USA - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 08:49:30 (ZULU)

CDC: It was that debate that made me think Paul was a loon. But I'm glad to have looked into it further.

Tony: Vote in the primary then:))

Geoff: I was going to make that point myself:)) If guns, shooting and hunting interests you...then this political crap is the entrance exam. Fail it, then you can kiss those pursuits goodbye. I have family in Philly, DC, LA, Boston, Houston, etc: The prevailing attitude is that guns are an archaic and unneccessary hold-over from a by-gone era. They are largely ignorant of life outside their little city-world, oblivious to how dependant they are to government services (water would be fun for them if the pipes go dry, eh?) They are also a very, very large segment of the vote. Thank god for electoral college. Our founders paranoia about government led to some great methods....and, the lack of mob rule has led some to call for the abolishment of the electoral college...and even some morons int hese cities advocate apportionment for the senate too. Yeah...pay attention. Several states already have taken steps to undermine the electoral process! As boring or frustrating as this subject is--it is the one subject that impacts us directly. It is worth the effort to stay informed.

Joe M
Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 09:10:14 (ZULU)

Guys,

I also love sex, but I'm not going to build my own vagina!

That said, I've been reading up more than usual for about six months on candidates.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 09:14:36 (ZULU)

Lindy Sometimes I just need a good laugh to get my morning back on track so that I quit acting like a bad person. That link was F'n hillarious, and did the trick. Not to mention pretty much true. Thanks

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 15:28:21 (ZULU)

CDC, I too watched that one live.

All Dr. Paul was trying to convey is that one HAS to figure out the root cause if one wants to prevent a reoccurance. That's it. That works for any problem! The jihadists didn't just wake up one day and say "let's blow up something in America for no reason". There were reasons that motivated them - he said we needed to understand their motivations. Our continued presence in Saudi was linked directly.

As he said, if the reasons they wanted to blow up something here were nothing more than they hate freedom and our way of life, then we can't do much about that. If it's something else, maybe we can.

Ronald Reagan put a bunch of Marines in Lebanon, and said to the world that they were there, and weren't going to be brought back. Change them through experiencing our culture. Jihadists took offense to those Marines being there, and we all know the outcome. After that, Ronnie re-evaluated his stance on doing such things, and no more Marines were sent to Lebanon. Lesson learned! If we're going to try to 'civilize' other countries - with our culture - then we need to expect bloodshed. Specifically ours - and specifically through terrorism.

When the new Iraqui army was started, I noted that they would accept Iraquis if they'd "only killed Americans". I found this to be a great affront initially, until I discussed it with Patron Joe. He's a smart puppy, no two ways about it. His answer was to ask me what I'd do if America was occupied by chicom troops - and we all know the answer to that one. So should the fact that I would kill occupying chicom forces mean I shouldn't be allowed in the "new American Army"? Nah. Enlightenment. He was good with their decision, and after explaining it better to me, so was I.

The more we occupy - and not just militarily - other countries, the more we have to expect bloodshed. Ours. Same reason.

I'm not saying that it's not terrorism, or that it's deserved, or that the lives lost in the end-run aren't 'worth it' - I'm just making an observation on what motivates these animals. And there are motivations.

Our continued presence in Saudi was a motivator - and that's all Dr. Paul is saying. If we want them to leave us alone, maybe we ought to evaluate whether it's best to leave them alone too. If our presence there 'in order to stabilize the region' or 'to protect American investments' or whatever is worth the potential terroristic retribution in the cost-benefit analysis, then that's fine. We just have to evaluate that on a cost-benefit analysis instead of going into areas blindly with the "we're big enough nobody can hurt us" attitude.

Obviously we can be hurt. If it's a hurt that is necessary, then we hurt. If it's not, then it's not the most intelligent thing in life to invite it anyway.

Bravo
Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 15:44:52 (ZULU)

Joe, reply to your rifleman acct incoming.

All, a couple of quotes you're all familiar with bear renewed thought in light of the recent discussions:

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." --Theodore Roosevelt, 1907

and

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. --Thomas Jefferson

There are implications flowing from both of these that even thoughtful men haven't plumbed yet.

SSG Mac
MOLON LABE, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 16:10:32 (ZULU)

Joe M

I have been having issues with email recently. Have you recieved anything from me in the last few days?

morg

Mourge
Overseas, - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 16:21:51 (ZULU)

There's one glaring omission in all this, the one that explains why we're not going to leave the Middle East. Light, sweet crude. Right or wrong, like it or not, America runs on hydrocarbon fuel. Until the lunatic bunny-huggers get told to STFU, and we start using our own oil resources, we're gonna be smack in the middle of Middle Eastern politics. We could easily remedy it, as most oil is too far underground to be affected by nuclear radiation, but that's not gonna happen. We're there, and going to stay for the forseeable future.

Charles S. Hunt
San Antonio, Texas, USA - Sunday, January 6, 2008, at 19:50:26 (ZULU)

SA, Iran, Iraq and Kuwait have 55% of the world's proven oil reserves among them, add the rest of the ME and you're upwards of 65%. US proven reserves will sustain US consumption at current levels for a little over 20 years, do you think that's really wise?

Where the granola crunching, bunny huggers need to STFU is with regards to nuclear energy as well as other sustainable resources such as tidal hydro power and other sources that the NIMBY asshats always try to prevent with the aid of the bunny huggers.

Sustainable fuels need to be exploited ie: biodiesel, alchohol, waste oil, methane, liquified coal fuels, etc. Conspiculous consumption needs to be discouraged. I'd also like to see people taken off the roads via ruthless enforcement of driver's licensing, insurance and registration laws. Probably 10-15% of the schmucks on the road are driving without license, registration or insurance. If you arrest them, jail them at hard labor(paving roads would be good) and crush repeat offenders cars(usually an old POS) you could contribute considerably to fuel conservation via decreased congestion.

The ME problem has been dozens of centuries in the making. The Islamic whack job, mainly Arab but spreading elsewhere, really doesn't think at all like us. I recently watched an excellent movie about "Suicide Bombers" narrated by former CIA Agent Bob(?) Barr, who also was involved in the CIA's efforts to foment Iraqi overthrow of Saddam post DS/DS. It does a good job of emphasizing how completely different their thought process is.

Based on this and other information, I really don't think there is any other real long term solution to the ME problem aside from complete and utter destruction of one side or the other. Indecision just prolongs the problem and squanders more of our own. S/F.....Ken M

Ken M
IL, USA - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 00:05:30 (ZULU)

US net oil consumption economics:

Can someone provide order-of-magnitude numbers of what the United States is spending on foreign oil compared to what it is spending on military expenditures in oil-rich countries?

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 00:21:14 (ZULU)

Gents,

Lots of great discourse about our country and it's current political candidates. Little about shooting...SSG Mac was right. Given that I firmly believe that this site is made up of a conglomeration of AMERICANS that want to see the future of thier country kept on track with it's founding core values. So, I welcome the comments because I respect where they are coming from and the experiences of the men who offer them.

Bravo and I had a nice chat the other night and a number of things came up including the topic of Ron Paul's presidential bid. Frankly, the more I study the man and learn about him the better I like him. A fresh no nonsense approach to many things. In short, his views approach my own in a great many areas...

It's interesting that some candidates are touting their expience and ability to get things done as the reason to support them. This when in fact both parties have done nothing positive or far reaching, but rather have given the illusion of doing something. If you want more of the same go ahead and vote for them.

My take is that Ron Paul is scaring the hell out of the old school politicians in BOTH parties because he is offering aperspective that makes sense and that I can agree with...get out of the international policing game, bring the troops home, stay out of other peoples business and start taking care of our issues at home. In short adopt a "Teddy Rooseveldt" style of diplomacy. "Walk softly and carry a big stick". Right now Ron Paul is the only Republican presidential hopeful that I could vote for...

I've mentioned Micheal Bloomberg, but have trouble with someone that want to buy a presidency. Not to mention his stances are relatively unknown...

The Democratic Camp is set to implode, IMHO. Obama will not get the bid in the long run. As I said before a party that can vote for someone that no longer salutes the flag is in big trouble. If Hillary makes it through the primaries without having a public screaming hissy fit I'd be suprised. A spot check uranalysis would be a good idea, because she'll have to be sedated to make it. Not to mention the fact that her credibility with people is shot...again, I refer to her as "damaged goods". The demo's don't have anyone else that could run and win against the republicans.

Again, I believe that Ron Paul WILL appeal to members of all parties because it is what is good for America in the long haul. Nuff said. Are you happy now, Bravo?

Oh, just found out that Fox News has refused to cover Ron Paul in their debates during the New Hampshire primary. NH Rebuplican Committee is PO'd as is Ron Paul's staff. Who says we don't have censorship in this country? Will have to see what shakes out there...

Gun Stuff: Finally found some batteries for my Aimpoint. The 1/3N's have been very hard to come by locally. It appears that my Aimpoint is "bleeding off" current when not in use or somesuch. Definitely not getting the battery life I've been led to believe/expect with my unit. Wish I had a unit that used AAA batteries or somesuch...Oh, well.

Reloading components are getting scarce and expensive. Talking with a rep the other day I was told to expect another increase of about 40% by summers end. Better get what you want now...

'Finger, how is your recovery coming?

Charles, when do you deploy?

Semper Fi,

Sir Wes

Wes Howe
Salem, OR, USA - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 00:49:46 (ZULU)

I concur with the nuclear power idea. What's not to like about it? Clean, quiet, only thing released into the atmosphere (hopefully)is steam. Biofuels....well, ethanol makes it hard for the Mexicans to get enough corn to make tortillas....perhaps that will make me in favor of it. Except I like corn tortillas. I think nuclear is our only real, viable option for the future.

Not sure of the actual wheels up date. Training is supposed to end on or about March 3rd. Should be shortly thereafter. We'll see. Only one week to go working as a police officer, and I'm getting the willies. Definitely eager to retire, but it's still like diving off the high board with the lights off....

Charles S. Hunt
San Antonio, Texas, USA - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 01:34:45 (ZULU)

Ken M: I believe you're thinking of Robert Baer, who spent 20 years with the CIA, and has written a couple of pretty good books about his experiences.

Click on my name for a link to a Wikipedia article about him.

Lindy
The Northern Occupied Territories of Mexico, Texas, U.S.A. - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 01:35:35 (ZULU)

Sir Wes:

1/3N good stock, pricing:

http://www.Digikey.com

P/N SY100-ND $26.33 for a 10-pack plus shipping

Great vendor, dealt with them for many years.

Wonderful source for lithium and silver oxide coin, button and cylinder batteries.

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 03:34:48 (ZULU)

That would be the one. "Cult of the Suicide Bomber" was the movie. I thought it was interesting as well as useful. It was an excellent supplement to the cultural briefing I was attending during the same timeframe. Sadly, said briefing essentially reinforced my existing belief that the only solution to the ME problem may well be the Mongol model, as that really has been the only force that created lasting change in the region. Most all people simply can't bring themselves to accept it, but killing the shit outta the population in question and/or ethnically segregating the people into distinct and discrete borders has proven to be the only thing that has EVER worked at achieving lasting change. But of course, 80% of the population of the US refuses to accept that historical reality because it's simply too ugly for their experience base to accept. Another 15% advocate doing the effective thing but they don't fully understand all or even most of the implications of what this sort of action will entail. Perhaps 5%, and I'm likely being generous here, of the population both understands the problem as well as the only historically proven solution. Maybe 1% can actually bring themselves to publically advocate that. Most people prefer to advocate action that has only the remotest chance of long term success ie "we're doing something" even if that "something" is futile. It's the same decision we faced during the Cold War, only the Communist religion had only been established for 30 years when we began to work towards it's downfall. Islamic radicalism has been established since the late 800's, it's influence is utterly pervasive and still spreading.

The increasing use of oxygenated fuels in the major urban pollution control areas is already driving up the cost of grain, perhaps reducing or eliminating the need for the programs that pay farmers to leave crop lands unplanted every year.

I recall reading that there are numerous blends of gasoline in use, based on varying state/regional requirements. Many of these could be eliminated, reducing production costs as well as making fuel more easily shifted to meet local/regional demands.

I'm a large fan of the hybrid cars for the urbanites who do nothing more than commute around their urban areas. I'm sure proper incentives could be applied to encourage folks to do the right thing in these areas. They may be butt ugly, but those Prius and Civic hybrid things gets consistant 50+ mpg. There's no reason similar tech can't be put into cars that are actually attractive:) S/F....Ken M

Ken M
Monday, January 7, 2008, at 03:58:26 (ZULU)

Guys,

Click my name for a link to the story someone posted an AP link to about a wolf attack a while back. This one has pics. GOOoooooood Doggie!

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 08:53:29 (ZULU)

Click my name for Texan of the year. I can't beleive this shit.

Travis Morgan
Wichita, Ks., U.S.A. - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 09:27:38 (ZULU)

Click.

BKS,

Hope this wasn't a friend of yours.

*********************SPEW ALERT***************************

SERIOUSLY. SWALLOW WHAT'S IN YOUR MOUTH, AND SET YOUR DRINK DOWN!!!

Seen at leverguns.com :

THE HORTH WHITHPERER

If you don't laugh out loud at this, you're just not trying!!

A guy calls his buddy, the horse rancher, and says he's sending a Friend over to look at a horse. His buddy asks, 'How will I recognize him?' 'That's easy; he's a midget with a speech impediment.' So, the midget shows up, and the guy asks him if he's looking for a Male or female horse.

'A female horth.' So he shows him a prized filly.

'Nith lookin horth. Can I thee her eyeth'?

So the guy picks up the midget and he gives the horse's eyes the once Over.

'Nith eyeth, can I thee her earzth'? So he picks the little fella up again, and shows him the horse's ears.

'Nith earzth, can I see her mouf'?

The rancher is getting pretty ticked off by this point,

But he picks him up again and shows him the horse's mouth.

'Nice mouf, can I see her twat'?

Totally mad as fire at this point, the rancher grabs him under his Arms and sticks the midget's head as far as he can up the horse's Fanny,

Pulls him out and plops him on the ground.

The midget gets up, sputtering and coughing. 'Perhapth I should rephrase that.

Can I thee her wun awound a widdlebit'?

Travis Morgan
Wichita, KS., U.S.A. - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 09:44:08 (ZULU)

" I'm sure proper incentives could be applied to encourage folks to do the right thing in these areas."

Yeah--The Federal government's behavioral modification codes (tax codes) can be re-written at will to do just that...OR:

"They" can grossly expand taxes on the bullets to modify your desire to stay in practice...or;

"They" can tax guns themselves out of existance for average folks; or--

"they" can tax and incentive you ass into a 1300 sq.ft. home; or:

"they" can put the squeeze on your state thru blackmail to prevent you, as a property owner, from allowing smoking (or not) in your dwellings.

It seems to me that if it is OK to use the tax code to subjugate us for "rightous" reasons, it is only a matter of whom "they" are at the time as to what, exactly, "righteous" means.

Its funny how we only know the current tax code, and how easily we accept the status quo as "normal."

Is it normal to hand over our basic liberties to the central government? That is what we have done by allowing this monster--the tax code--the light light of the damned day.

Sure---it is used for "decent purposes" at times....but it is a power unto itself--and those who determine "decent" do not have my blind faith at all. Yet, that power stands out there....just waiting for use one way or another. Is that what America was founded on? Or was there supposed to be something else to this experiment?

Unalienable rights....for those who can afford to pay the tax rate.

Food for thought:))

Joe M
Monday, January 7, 2008, at 10:36:42 (ZULU)

Sir Wes Get the EOTech 552. I had a used one that was in the sandbox for a year for sale on the exchange a couple months ago and it went fast. Sorry. The one on my M4 still has the origional batteries that I put in it last year. It get's inadvertantly left on all the time and has to shut it self of after 8 hours. Use's AA. I give it 4 stars. If you get one get the quick detach mount system for it that voids the warenty, but it's worth it.

Jeff Cooper
Gadsden, TN, - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 14:21:52 (ZULU)

re: Aimpoint battery life:

Sir Wes doesn't say which model he has, but I'm guessing it is something like the CompM2 whihc used the CR-1/3N batteries.

(2000 release vintage).

Aimpoint's more recent products apparently have a longer rated battery life than their earlier designs. The big upgrade is a new generation of more efficient LEDs. ( ACET technology ). That would include the CompM4, 9000L, Micro series.

The Micro T-1 is pretty neat, uses single CR2016 lithium coin battery, size of a small apple.

http://www.aimpoint.com/products/aimpoint_product_lines/aimpoint_micro_t-1

I purchased the similar H-1 for a shotgun, didn't need the nightvision, extreme temperature or submergence depth rating of the T-1 which costs extra.

I don't like how Aimpoint rates battery life, they tend to emphasize night vision settings, which will make any battery life look good.

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 16:42:52 (ZULU)

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C. S. Lewis

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 16:45:55 (ZULU)

Hybrid vehicles-some years back there was a guy in Charlottesville, VA (?) doing conversions, preferably on Toyota pickups. He'd replace your factory motor with an electric motor and use a 2 lung diesel of about 30 hp to turn a generator. There was a battery bank for high amp load support.

In other words, he made a pickup run on the same principle as a diesel-electric locomotive. Fuel milage was allegedly near 90 mpg since the diesel ran constant speed.

Now there folks, is an idea. No high-tech batteries, no funny looking vehicles and little, if any, performance compromise. I can't find the guy now. I suspicion the EPA put him out of business. The tree huggers don't like the system cause it uses old technology and fosil fuels. Detroit & Tokyo don't like it cause it uses old technology and requires retooling without off-setting tax credits.

WR Moore
Monday, January 7, 2008, at 17:33:54 (ZULU)

Enviro country:

How about tax *credits* to shape desirable behaviour?

Seems like more of a carrot than stick approach.

rod regier
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 23:16:29 (ZULU)

So, how about a hybrid Humvee?

Click on my name for the link. See also:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/hmmwv-he.htm

and

http://www.gizmag.com/go/3477/

Lindy
The Northern Occupied Territories of Mexico, Texas, U.S.A. - Monday, January 7, 2008, at 23:44:07 (ZULU)

Back to Archives