The race seems to have left the Lesser Clinton behind - the media have all but declared her "Out."
So what's she doing, stumping like there's no tomorrow?
I propose this idea: She is planting the seeds for the race she can win - against an incumbent John McCain in 2012. I believe she thinks that Obama can't win, even though he can't lose the nomination, so she is working to ensure his defeat in the fall. It's the ultimate Clintonian/Machiavellian move, which may be too clever by half. The country could easily vote in the (extremely) junior Senator from Illinois in a fit of joie de vie this November, or McCain might actually get enough done by 2012, without pissing off conservatives too badly to prevent him from achieving a second term.
And then there's the scary specter of an older, wiser Obama, returned from his completed term in the Senate, ready to Take The Reigns.
The other potentiality, that she thinks she can be the "Comeback Kid," is just too laughable to contemplate...
Unless she has something on him - a breakthrough Tony Rezko confession, or a love-child, or secret video of him sprouting horns and dancing around with a dead chicken over a five-pointed star. If she has a "Deal Killer," she better go ahead and get it out there... it's starting to get late in the game.
One thing I know after dealing with Clintons for 8 years is that ANYTHING is possible. Troublesome scandal? Blame the person who uncovers it! Problematic Bimbo Eruption? Bomb an aspirin factory in some dirty Third-World hole where nobody can counter your story. Burn down a church full of women and kids? Hide the evidence and let Butch Reno sweep it under the rug.
These folks can do anything and get away with it. Whatever she's got up her sleeve's going to be an awful fright to whomever she will loose it upon.
It looks like Hillary has secured a win in Pennsylvania... and it smells an awful lot like New Hampshire, when the teary-eyed baring of her soul on national TV propelled her to a win when she was looking like she'd come in third.
Pundits and pollsters have predicted Obama's expenditure of around $11 million clams on attack ads would shrink her lead and perhaps would deliver the "coup de grâce" to her failing campaign. This belief was largely upheld by, once again, polling that revealed a tendency for the Democratic electorate to seek "Change." Hillary, as it was described to us, would represent More Of The Same - a continuation of America's Feuding Families: Bush v. Clinton, Clinton v. Bush, and so on. Obama would be our last good shot at fixing things before the country went totally down the tubes to Big Oil/Pharma, Corporate Outsourcers and the mortgage pirates.
That was when things started going wrong with Big O.
Two weeks back, Barry O said a dumb, dumb thing in front of what he thought was a sympathetic crowd. He was inadvertently recorded, and his debasement of Middle America in front of a bunch of billionaires began a downhill slide for him that continued with his lackluster performance at last Sunday's debate (see below) and has ended with him losing, and from all reports, losing BIG to Senator Clinton in Pennsylvania. I think the folks that want "Change" but are nervous about what it's going to take to get there may have moved in a Clintonian direction.
So how come the poll results are so confusing?
I call it as "White Liberal Guilt." This little monster tends to rear its head whenever Middle-Class White folks discuss people of color - they trip over the words attempting to announce that they are not a bunch of seething cross-burners or nonhipsters. African Americans have long been subjected to racism, their minds shout, so I GOTTA SHOW how NON-RACIST I AM!!
Note that White Liberal Guilt doesn't come out of hatred or adoration of anyone's culture or anything, but rather more understated fears of ostracization from other White folks because of a naughty failure to observe political correctness. They are afraid that if they say anything, anything at all that could be misperceived as "racist" about a person who happens to be non-White will cause other folks to view them as insipid, close-minded, and old-fashioned. Unfashionable. Unforgivable. Such misapprehensions can damage relationships in a long-lasting manner, as the modern paradigm of character-judgment offers no redemption for White bigotry.
So how does White Liberal Guilt feature into Hillary's win?
Comfort zone, perhaps - the woman DID spend time in the White House, after all. Racism a factor? Certainly to some extent. Obama's youth and apparent inexperience? Dopey statements and problematic relationships surrounding Big O? These last two are probably the largest factor, and the teflon-coating on the candidate is starting to wear thin. The net result is that, like New Hampshire, folks told the pollsters what they thought they'd want to hear based on their White Liberal Guilt, and did what they wanted to do when they hit the voting booth.
Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibbons asked some damaging questions tonight of both candidates, and by all accounts, the hard issues they brought up were largely unwelcomed by either candidate. The event, in my opinion, broke down into a base examination of why either candidate will lose to John McCain in the fall. There were no saving grace moments, gaffes abounded on both sides, and only the hardcore Left will mindlessly see this unpolished (at best) debate as anything but a gut-wrenching failure for Socialism.
It was all a pretty typical assault upon the opposing candidates' characters, except this time the taunts were accurate criticisms. That these criticisms were brought to the fore by the other member of their party lays the groundwork for the survivor's destruction at the hands of a prepared, cranky, well-spoken and intolerant contrarian like McCain who has better credentials and a markedly higher "likeability index" than either of the two Democrats. Yes, if this continues to devolve into the catastrophic tailspin, Rush Limbaugh's dream of "Operation Chaos" will be realized and conservatives will have their own easy win in the fall.
At one point, Hillary suggested the Repubs atone for the Bush Administration's inadequacies by "just bowing out of the election as an apology" out of shame of their manifold failures by not running anyone in the election. Wouldn't that give that Leftist Fascist the ballot that tin-hats like Stalin have organized on election day, where they're the only entrant, while perhaps secret police could collect the results? It's a tyrant's dream! Running unencumbered! That's how Hitler attainted power; he had no practical competitor in 1934 and certainly none thereafter. I am sure he had every desire to appear to be the best choice, even if he was the only one. Such a nakedly voiced wish for that ideal should scare the pants off of every right-thinking American who ever picked up a history book and read about this kind of politicial usurpation.
Can you imagine that terrible woman in power? The kind of tyrant who "believes in the Second Amendment" but thinks it should be subject to reasonable restriction, presumably to eclipse the practical exercise of those rights by free men as a potential roadblock to that tyrant's dream of absolute power.
I guess I too am guilty of clinging to my guns and my religion. This close-mindedness has apparently made me unable to understand their Progressive beliefs. Hooray for me! My benighted state continues unabated!
Note: This post was originally put on the board on Sunday night after the debate. I was crafting it on my PDA, and was not paying much attention to sentence structure, spelling, or any of the other things that are conducive to coherence in writing. I have gone back through it, aghast and ashamed, and cleaned it up.
What will he say next? In a speech delivered last Sunday (yes, it took the Main Stream Media that long to get it out) to a closed group of wealthy donors in San Francisco, he said:
"But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What’s the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is — so, we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide health care for every American. So we’ll go down a series of talking points.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Wow. Just WOW. People in small towns are suffering because the government hasn't been there to minister to their every need. It's not their fault - it's the fault of the Bush Administration, of big business, of [insert Socialist-identified bugaboo villain here] which leads those people to seek respite from their troubles in a mindless worship of Jesus, or to lash out with hate of those even less-fortunate Hispanic newcomers to the American workplace, or to "delve into a culture of gun-worship" to defray their economic suffering. I guess Senator Obama has not priced out an AR15 lately - you've got to be doing well to afford many of these toys, aside from the OBVIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM CRIMINALS.
Such arrogance is truly amazing. Would Senator Obama's own religious proclivities, which have been well-documented, be a salve for his own sense of dissatisfaction with America? Could this be a bit of Freudian projection? Does the citizenry being angry at a government for doing nothing about an utterly lawless community within our nation reflect some sort of nation-wide sociopathy? Are people who take their personal and community defense seriously "escaping the reality of their economic downturn?"
This candidate for President of the United States of America will be eventually recognized as being an elitist and being percieved as "out-of-touch" by American voters. Whether or not this happens prior to or after his election is in question, but it WILL happen nonetheless. If it is the latter, I suspect great upheaval will follow.
Once again, I have told you that I won't be voting for him. Neither should you.
I have eschewed politics for a couple of years, owing to the fact that there are already a couple of people who comment on the topic and one more dopes opinion is as useful in the world as 370 gallons of cold bacon grease.
Caution be damned, however, as the antics of the two least sensible participants in the current election give witness to their mutual unsuitability for the position of President of the United States. Our Leftmost candidate, Senator Obama, has revealed himself as an apologist for some intolerably racist and America-hating sensitivities, and his opponent, Senator Clinton, has engaged in at least five "Classic Clintonian" behaviors just this week that serve to remind the voting public why her and her miscreant husband should remain as far from the seat of power as is physically possible. Today I will examine what I consider to be a severe tarnishing of Senator Obama's reputation, and tomorrow I will take up with Senator Clinton's missteps.
The Honorable Senator from the Great State of Illinois has, in the last 20 days or so, burned through the goodwill he achieved by beating Senator Clinton in many primary races. In doing so, we have had a greater chance to examine his record and, finding it rather thin; we have looked and found him implicitly cheering on some surprisingly racist and dysfunctional statements by his minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. These statements caused a number of Americans who were genuinely compelled by the Senator's egalitarian platitudes after each primary victory to become disdainful of his stated beliefs and intentions. White folks (I have largely considered myself "White" for many years while admittedly hovering on the edge of this group owing to my Greek ancestry) have been held to a fantastically high standard of "color blindness" for the last 30 years. We have drummed from existence the intolerant amongst us, the stirrers of the pot, the loudmouths with their ribald jokes about dumb Polaks and Jews and Blacks.
That color blindness, which has been rigidly self-enforced in both public institutions and private, in Hollywood, at church and at the family table, is our race's conscious effort to destroy this aspect of imperfection in our character - some twisted belief that we are "better" than other people because of some physical characteristic, instead of how we serve society and treat our neighbors.
It is not so unpredictable that White people would exhibit surprised dismay when they realized there was an entire church of people in the United States cheering a man screaming "God DAMN America!" or nodding their heads in agreement to the ridiculous assertion that the U.S. Government invented a disease meant to specifically attack people of color.
That kind of racial intolerance just does not reveal itself in White communities, at least not in any of the places I have been hanging out in for the last 30 years. It wouldn't stand the light of day - like a mold that's exposed to bleach and dry conditions, it just does not grow here. Indeed, I could sense, in talking to friends, reading blogs, and chatting with my wife a sense of shock that there could be such an undercurrent of racial hatred in a time where the racial insanities of Jim Crow can only be recalled in black and white. I'm 43, grew up in the South, and don't have a memory of "colored" water fountains or bathrooms.
So why did this mold grow in Trinity Church in Chicago? What dysfunction caused this sort of ignorant pap to become part of any Christian church's message? Moreover, can you find a church in any White community that has more than seventeen misfits with swastikas scribed on their foreheads that preaches the same kind of nonsense about people of color? Such a place would be the site of a daily protest by free-thinking Americans - so where are the Americans who are protesting Trinity Church's message of intolerance and disunity?
More importantly, and more directly to the point, why didn't the leading Democratic candidate for President of the United States lead himself and his family out of that place shaking his head in disbelief? Why only now is he casting off Reverend Albatross from around his neck? Is it merely a means of distancing himself from his belief structure now that the media's discovery of his implicit support of Wright's crazy rants threatens his run for President? Moreover, do we want a man who so effectively hides his beliefs in such a Clintonesque fashion to again be near the seat of power? How could we trust a man with such deeply-held hatreds to be responsible for the general welfare and defense of a country he seems to despise?
I had a brief romance with Obama - a "man-crush" in the vernacular of our times, because he seemed like an open-minded person who could, for the first time in eight years, communicate our great nation's intentions to the other leaders of the world with something greater than a fourth-grade set of communications skills. I didn't figure this wooly Leftist's behavior could be much of a threat to free people because there would be enough pressure around him not to go too far off the reservation. The revelation that he essentially endorsed Wright's teachings reveals his hidden potential for mischief. Leftists often slide their way into power on good wishes and fine talk, then use the power of the state to ruthlessly thrust their ideas on an unsuspecting public, usually to the unrelenting harm of the citizenry - you need only look at Venezuela's demented Leftist tinpot to see what happens when you elect such a person to the seat of power in your country.
I would not vote for Obama if I were you. I won't be, that's for sure. Tomorrow, I will take up with the other contender, Senator Clinton. Check back in at that time!
Read this story from The Emporia Gazette:
Ethan Moyer is far too young to worry about the rigors of military training or the dangers of combat. But the 9-year-old Emporian wanted to become a member of the U.S. Army, and his mom, Debbie Coleman, is very grateful that the Army and the Make-A-Wish Foundation came together to make it happen.
Young Ethan Moyer is a patriot, albeit a sick one, and if his illness relents, he wants to be a soldier when he turns 18. You see, this child loves the Army - and wants to be a part of that great organization.
I guess loving your country just can't be drummed out of some people by the public education system. Please read this story; you might discover something in your eye, too.
I did some more research - the piece I posted last Saturday was written as a monologue for boys to memorize and perform by Rev. Ellijah Kellogg, a Maine native who lived between 1792 and 1835. He was the son of a minister as well, and that man fought in the Revolutionary War, which doubtlessly influenced the son to write of this.
The piece was abbreviated, I think, by my father, so it would fit on the board and still be legible.
Here it is in full:
Spartacus to the Gladiators at Capua
Ye call me chief; and ye do well to call him chief who for twelve long years has met upon the arena every shape of man or beast the broad Empire of Rome could furnish, and who never yet lowered his arm. If there be one among you who can say that ever, in public fight or private brawl, my actions did belie my tongue, let him stand forth and say it. If there be three in all your company dare face me on the bloody sands, let them come on.
And yet I was not always thus,--a hired butcher, a savage chief of still more savage men. My ancestors came from old Sparta, and settled among the vine-clad rocks and citron groves of Syrasella. My early life ran quiet as the brooks by which I sported; and when, at noon, I gathered the sheep beneath the shade, and played upon the shepherd's flute, there was a friend, the son of a neighbor, to join me in the pastime. We led our flocks to the same pasture, and partook together our rustic meal. One evening, after the sheep were folded, and we were all seated beneath the myrtle which shaded our cottage, my grandsire, an old man, was telling of Marathon and Leuctra; and how, in ancient times, a little band of Spartans, in a defile of the mountains, had withstood a whole army. I did not then know what war was; but my cheeks burned, I know not why, and I clasped the knees of that venerable man, until my mother, parting the hair from off my forehead, kissed my throbbing temples, and bade me go to rest, and think no more of those old tales and savage wars.
That very night the Romans landed on our coast. I saw the breast that had nourished me trampled by the hoof of the war-horse,--the bleeding body of my father flung amidst the blazing rafters of our dwelling! To-day I killed a man in the arena; and, when I broke his helmet-clasps, behold! he was my friend. He knew me, smiled faintly, gasped, and died;--the same sweet smile upon his lips that I had marked, when, in adventurous boyhood, we scaled the lofty cliff to pluck the first ripe grapes, and bear them home in childish triumph!
I told the prætor that the dead man had been my friend, generous and brave; and I begged that I might bear away the body, to burn it on a funeral pile, and mourn over its ashes. Ay! upon my knees, amid the dust and blood of the arena, I begged that poor boon, while all the assembled maids and matrons, and the holy virgins they call Vestals, and the rabble, shouted in derision, deeming it rare sport, forsooth, to see Rome's fiercest gladiator turn pale and tremble at the sight of that piece of bleeding clay! And the prætor drew back as I were pollution, and sternly said, "Let the carrion rot; there are no noble men but Romans."
And so, fellow-gladiators, must you, and so must I, die like dogs. O Rome! Rome! thou hast been a tender nurse to me. Ay! thou hast given to that poor, gentle, timid shepherd lad, who never knew a harsher tone than a flute-note, muscles of iron and a heart of flint; taught him to drive the sword through plaited mail and links of rugged brass, and warm it in the marrow of his foe;--to gaze into the glaring eyeballs of the fierce Numidian lion, even as a boy upon a laughing girl! And he shall pay thee back, until the yellow Tiber is red as frothing wine, and in its deepest ooze thy life-blood lies curdled!
Ye stand her now like giants, as ye are! The strength of brass is in your toughened sinews, but to-morrow some Roman Adonis, breathing sweet perfume from his curly locks, shall with his lily fingers pat your red brawn, and bet his sesterces upon your blood. Hark! hear ye yon lion roaring in his den? 'Tis three days since he has tasted flesh; but to-morrow he shall break his fast upon yours,--and a dainty meal for him ye will be!
If ye are beasts, then stand here like fat oxen, waiting for the butcher's knife! If ye are men, follow me! Strike down yon guard, gain the mountain passes, and there do bloody work, as did your sires at old Thermopylæ! Is Sparta dead? Is the old Grecian spirit frozen in your veins, that you do crouch and cower like a belabored hound beneath his master's lash? O comrades! warriors! Thracians! if we must fight, let us fight for ourselves! If we must slaughter, let us slaughter our oppressors! If we must die, let it be under the clear sky, by the bright waters, in noble, honorable battle!
I am getting some perspective on the piece now at 43 - I have been looking at it all the days of my life, and now I can discern where my father got the piece, and what his thinking was when he edited it for brevity. Thanks to the Internet, I have learned something about my father I didn't know!
I was fathered by a fine man, a Warrior-Teacher. He served our nation through its' longest and coldest war, and when he tragically passed 17 years ago just the other day, still relatively young, he bequeathed to me a curious relic.
See, he had an artistic soul, and was compelled as a young man in the 60's and 70's to produce some fine works in a variety of media - pen, pencil, oils, carpentry.
I have several of the paintings, and they are as striking today as they were when I was a child. My most prized possession, however, is a worn piece of calligraphy which hangs, fading and warped from years of mistreatment, on my gun room wall.
It is a message from Spartacus to the Gladiators.
I have looked for this piece on the internet and have never been able to find it. I would like very much to see the book he took this passage from so I can see the context in which it is written. It is presumably a recollection of the words said by Spartacus to his Gladiators as he urged them to join him in revolt, and what they must certainly have known was suicide - for they would directly challenge the authority of the state of Rome. Few who did that before Spartacus or after lived very long. As it stands, it is the very quintessence of The Warrior Spirit:
Ye call me Chief, and ye would do well to call him Chief who, for twelve long years, has met upon the arena every shape of man or beast that the broad empire of Rome could furnish, and has never yet lowered his arm... Yet I was not always thus, a hired butcher, a savage chief of more savage men. My early life ran quiet as the brook by which I sported. I was taught to prune the vine, to tend the flock, and at noon I gathered my sheep beneath the shade, and played upon the shepherd's flute. I had a friend, a neighbor's son; we led our flocks to the same pasture, and shared our rustic meal...
Today I killed a man in the arena, and when I broke his helmet-clasps, behold, he was my boyhood friend. He knew me - smiled faintly - gasped - and died.... I told the Praetor he was my friend, noble and brave, and I begged for his body, that I might burn it upon the funeral pile, and mourn over his ashes. Aye, on my knees, amid the dust and blood of the arena, I begged that favor, while all the Roman maids and matrons, and those holy virgins they call "vestal," and the rabble shouted mockery, but the Praetor drew back as if I were pollution, and sternly said, "Let the carrion rot! There are no noble men but Romans!
O Rome! Rome! Thou hast been a tender nurse to me! Aye, thou hast given to that poor, gentle, timid shepherd lad, who never knew a harsher sound than a flute note, muscles of iron and a heart of flint; taught him to drive the sword through rugged brass and plaited mail, and warm it in the marrow of his foe! To gaze into the eyeballs of the fierce Numidian lion, even as a smooth-cheeked boy upon a laughing girl. And he shall pay the back, Rome, 'til they yellow Tiber River is red as frothing wine, and in its deepest ooze they lifeblood lies curdled!
Ye stand here now like giants, as ye are! Hark ye you lion roaring in his den? 'Tis three days since he tasted meat; but tomorrow he shall break his fast upon your flesh, and ye shall be a dainty meal for him.
If ye are brutes, stand here like fat oxen waiting the butcher's knife; if ye are men, follow me! Strike down yon sentinel, gain the mountain passes, and there do bloody work as did your sires at old Thermopylae! Is Sparta dead? Is the old Grecian spirit frozen in your veins, that ye do crouch and cower like base-born slaves beneath your master's lash? O Comrades! Warriors! Thracians! If we must fight, let us fight for ourselves; if we must die, let us die under the open sky, by the bright waters, in noble, honorable battle.
I have elected to drag my poor spouse Princess and my neighbor-friend Dave to the drunken saturnalia known as the Denver St. Patrick's Day Parade, being held tomorrow from 10a.m. to 1:30p.m. in Lower Downtown, also known as LoDo. As Princess is the one in our family who has a bit o' the Blarney in her, I think it important for her to attend so as to enhance her cultural connection with this portion of her lineage.
We are to meet famous blogger Richard Combs of Combs Spouts Off, one of our Hero Bloggers here in the Denver Metro Area, at the Union Station turn for the parade. Richard writes poignant, intelligent and sharp-minded commentary on current events, from the Spitzer fiasco to the Pink Poodle Incident.
There's a gun show tomorrow and Sunday in Denver at the Merchandise Mart. Dave and I will be in attendance Sunday with Richard. You are welcome to meet us there, 11-ish, at the back tables where we usually go. Our brother Jed from FreedomSight will not be attending; he is compelled to avoid the nasty temptation of a gun purchase. Doubtlessly through his puritanical denial of self-pleasure, he will attain the strength and personal calm he is seeking. Resist, oh Brother, resist!
I am commiting to go to "Phase Two-Alpha" in the search for for Dave's AR-10-type hunting/personal defense rifle.
It seems that DPMS makes a rifle that weighs in at just under 8 lbs., and they sell a four-round mag for the weapon - in its other role, you can always pop a FAL 20-rounder in there for good measure. Add a nice Leupold VXIII scope and that takes the weight to right around 10 lbs with sling; perhaps a little heavy in the field, but a damn sight lighter than the comparable Armalite product at 10.4 lbs without scope or mag. Cradling a long gun in the brush for three hours, or hauling the dog-gone thing up a hill after a long walk can flat wear a man down. Every ounce counts after around 10 lbs.
But Dave's a big man. He can make the effort, and for a MOLDD dude (Middle-Aged Old Dude) he's in good condition. I have faith that this guy will go into the field and come back on his boots, not on a gurney.
My only concern is that the DPMS product uses FAL magazines. Sure, they're cheap, but so are Hyundais - and you wouldn't drive the Pope around in a Hyundai, would you? I have read that some manufacturers that will go nameless (like Bushmaster, for one) ;-) had serious trouble with their rifles as they could never solve their feeding problems - with FAL magazines.
DPMS has been making these guns a couple of years at least - and their model lineup in the .30-cal range has done nothing but expand. I can't imagine they'd have market success if the rifles weren't going bang every time the trigger gets pulled, although I will research this more before I give my "thumbs up" to a gunbuddy on a product or service. It sounds arrogant, I know, but I can't recall the last piece of gear I recommended that wasn't heartily loved by one of my pals - and I'd hate to change that trend.
I have a neighbor friend I will call Dave. I have injected poor Dave with an evil and insidious infection known as Black Rifle Disease. I have taken this poor bloke to the range a few times and have let him shoot some AR-15s, my Carbon 15 (what a rifle!), and my G-3/HK91 and HK-93 clones, and on the last shoot, he nearly collapsed from lust over the experience.
Dave is a successful single man who's looking for love in all the right places; i.e. gun shops. He is now primarily looking for The One, that special bond a man makes with a battle-rifle, so his heart is now set on finding an AR-10 of some sort... He likes the feeling he gets when he shoots the AR-15 but wants to "dual-use" the weapon as a personal protection/hunting gun, so the AR-10 is the natural choice, being offered in .308 AND with a 5-round magazine for the law-abiding sportsman.
In searching for a good deal on Dave's gun for him (it's gotten so that I can't get through a day without one of my friends asking me to help them find the right gun for them, mount a scope to one I have built for them, or to teach them pistol basics) I discovered that there's a rifle school that teaches the Art of the Long Gun to the military and the police organizations, and have now offered courses to endow the Great Unwashed such as myself with their valued knowledge.
The school is called PRW, which stands for Precision Rifle Workshop, and it has been created as a traveling school for Front-Range area shooting ranges. In their civilian offering, this school has in its cirricula, courses ranging from pure-D "this here's tha BIDNESS END, what the bullets come outta!" to advanced long-range shooting against moving targets, called "PRW-Hunter 1000," with this mouth-watering description:
"Put that favorite hunting rifle and your shooting skills to the test. PRW will take you out and let you shoot from 100 to 1000 yards. We'll show you what you and your rifle are capable of one on one with a PRW Instructor. Unknown distance training and moving targets. We don't expect you to shoot your game at 1000 yards, but this will be a huge confidence builder for that 350 yard shot. (120 rounds) ($350 One Long 12-14 hour Day)"
Sounds pretty exciting, doesn't it? I am eager to see how my "go-to" long-range rifle would handle this course. Clearly, the man behind the boomstick will be the primary factor in successfully completing such a course, and while I have plenty of trigger time, it's never been as a result of formal training. I'd certainly learn a thing or twelve. There's a more basic course which might be less of a challenge for me to take on called PRW Hunter Advanced. If you've ever read my blog, you'll understand that I don't point the Business End at anything that isn't threatening me, and as the Safeways continue to stock beef cow, I doubt that starvation would drive me to hunt, but... it's good to be prepared.
Anyway, more to come on Dave's descent into Black Rifle Madness and the school. Once Dave gets his shootin' ahron, I think I'm gonna cajole the hapless feller into taking that course with me.
Hello, I am Libercontrarian.
I am posting again, for the first time in just under a year. I feel like Lazarus, returning from the grave, disoriented and a little scared.
Much good has happened. Lives have been changed, mostly for the better. I have taken some minor personal adventures - a trip to a foreign land, bought three new cars, and dug myself into some rather impressive consumer debt. Bought a few guns along the way, shot some rounds downrange, converted a few Sheep into Sheepdogs.
Princess and I continue to be grateful for our health, our stable lives, our animal-family - oh, we added a couple of friends, then three or four more by default. Things are a little tight in the new home.
I am not certain that I won't be wasting your time here in the future. There are no guarantees - I went back and read some of my old posts, and was able to give myself some constructive criticism - "Hey, lighten up on the sentence structure, the emotionality, the paragraph length. Make people WANT to read this stuff!"
I am not sure that I want to commit to posting daily. I suspect my fatigue grew originally out of a compulsive need to make certain I made the most stinging rebukes, the most convincing arguments, the brightest observations... I was like that dopey kid who always raises his hand in class (and true-to-form, Mr. Arrogant-Know-It-All WAS that kid); a little overeager and severe.
There are many interesting things to discuss here - there have been numerous suicidal mass-shootings over the past year; indeed I can safely say it's a trend amongst the sociopaths and the weak-minded. We have an election that has unprecedented events happening: a man of mixed-race ancestry looks to be making a successful bid for the White House, as is a woman. The War looks like it's going... almost better.
Where do I go with this? What will I do? I will definitely continue to talk about guns. I will discuss politics on here again. Maybe I'll redesign the damned thing and let some buddies post here.
We shall see. I make no commitments other than to likely offend some of you. ;-)
The never-ending manipulation from the Left about guns has cost more Americans their lives this week - a man fatally shot a coworker yesterday at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, taking another hostage and finally ending the whole affair by shooting himself to death. This man performed this heinous act in another so-called "Gun-Free Zone," where the law-abiding are disempowered to hold the one tool that equalizes them with their assailant - a firearm.
It has been said that God made Men, and Sam Colt made them all equal. There is merit there; guns were banned by the Shoguns in Nihon because they upset the advantage of the powerful over the weak and of the rich over the poor. We now live in a country where the deranged can conceive of vicious plots to commit acts of mass-murder, for what twisted "benefit" we can only guess at. These evil monsters, and even their less sociopathic fellow run-of-the-mill criminals will not be dissuaded by the violation of any laws limiting their access to or illegal possession and use of firearms. These people will do what they do, and only good men can stop them. Since the most effective way to stop an assailant armed with a gun is with a gun, why should we go out of our way to advertise places where the violently insane can shoot victims with no fear of reprisal?
Why, again, do we have "Gun-Free Zones?" Anybody? Bueller? Bueller?
Except today, the slaughter came to our country.
A gunman, possibly aggrieved at a girlfriend, shot and killed 32 innocent students at Virginia Tech today. He then turned the gun upon himself, which every American wishes he had done PRIOR to taking that firearm out to harm the first victim, his girlfriend.
I am deeply saddened at the loss of these defenseless students to the most senseless of all tragedies, random violence. I can only imagine their complete and utter horror as the victims ran to the doors, attempting escape, only to discover the demonically insane gunman had chained the doors shut to maximize his opportunity for slaughter by minimizing their opportunity for escape.
I can only, and sadly, wonder at what would have happened if one student - just one kid - violated school policy and had carried his concealed weapon into the classroom, and shot that maniac before he could kill the 32 victims he managed to murder.
Such an event was ruled out by the Virginia state legislature, however. Some four months ago, a bill was defeated that would have specifically protected concealed carry of weapons by licensed holders onto the campus. Such a law would supersede the school's already absolute restriction on weapons of nearly every kind, including fencing foils. This restriction, however, had no demonstrable effect on the viciously criminal behaviors exhibited by that gunman, as do most laws on the lawbreakers. Laws protect society from the tender disobediences of the largely non-criminal majority, and have only force and bearing on those people who are fearful of the penalties.
For the mad dog who is only interested in slaughter, only three things can make him quit: suicide, attack by an organized security force, and disarmament by the pool of as-yet uninjured victims. The first two have the annoying tendency of coming well after the terminus of the event, thus resulting in the highest casualties. The last is what stops cold the attack, but requires the will to not be like the citizens of Babi-Yar, who marched nervously to the unending hammering of the machine guns, telling themselves that the Germans were giving them delousing showers. This perhaps requires the greatest courage: to take the chance that by risking more, personally, you may end the affair before it reaches the originator’s intent. That is the Warrior Spirit.
I am not sure that there is an answer here. I would, however, prefer to be armed if I was to be locked into a room with a crazed gunman. I would hope for a bit of the Warrior Spirit to rely upon in any case - I could conceive no worse end than pleading with some twisted individual, on my knees, living my last several moments knowing that I was unable to prevent my death because of my fear of losing the opportunity to get away without confronting the evil that has revealed itself before me.
If you are religious, say a prayer for the souls of the 32 people who saw an early and unworthy end this morning. Pray for the consolation of their relatives, and pray for the people of our nation to have strength to face this loss. Remember that the people of Iraq see this type of thing happening on a daily basis - our suffering in this world is not unique, nor are we alone. Pray for some positive outcome that will reveal itself from this event, although in our current state of grief I think that it is not an easy task.
The tables may be turning for Second Amendment advocates and for free citizens everywhere in the U.S. - the D.C Circuit Court today reviewed and ruled on the District's unconstitutional gun ban, in effect for like 34 years, and found it... UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Among their rulings:
"There is an individual right to keep and bear arms."
Huh? Wha? "Individual right?"
The D.C. city attorneys claim upset, and say they are taking this... to the Supreme Court! GASP! Could it be the Supremes have to rule on a gun rights issue in our lifetimes, instead of assiduously ducking the target like they've done since their flawed ruling in Miller vs. United States (1934)?
Go see my friend Jed from Freedom Sight on this deal; he has the complete story, including some damned insightful analysis on the topic. I will be attending the morrow's Libertarian breakfast and follow-on gun show, and will be educating myself further on the ruling, making myself ready to comment intelligently in tomorrow's posting.
They are now to be referred to as "Voluntarily Expatriated Northwardly Mobile Latin Americans."
This is sarcasm, of course, and I'd love to take credit for it - but it's not mine.
Recently seen, from John Boehner of OH (R), in response to a voter's concern:
Dear Joey :
Thank you for contacting me regarding the 1994 "assault weapons" ban. It is good to hear from you.
In 1994, the House of Representatives voted by a slim margin of 216-214, to ban the manufacture and sale of 19 specific semi-automatic firearms. Please be aware that I fought against the ban in 1994 and will once again oppose it should any similar measure come before the House floor.
Violent crime is a serious issue in our nation, and I have consistently fought for stronger enforcement of federal violent crime laws and for stronger penalties for violent criminals. I voted against the 1994 gun ban, however, because I believe that banning these firearms was more of a symbolic gesture to a particular constituency than a serious and substantive attack on violent crime. In addition, I do not believe that it is right to deny the legitimate rights of Americans who own firearms when it can't be proven that the ban would substantially and directly reduce crime.
It is important to recognize the facts about semi-automatic firearms. These guns use the same ammunition as other types of firearms and are not inherently more powerful or dangerous than other firearms. The only substantive difference between the banned semi-automatic firearms and the still legal semi-automatic firearms was that the banned ones happen to look more menacing. By contrast, an automatic weapon, also called a "machine gun," fires multiple shots rapidly with a single pull of the trigger. The federal government has severely restricted machine gun ownership and sale since 1934 including completely banning several types. The "assault weapons" ban has absolutely no effect on these guns. No semi-automatics sold to civilians are readily convertible to automatic fire. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) does not approve for sale any firearm that is easy to convert into a machine gun. It is already a felony to convert a semi-automatic firearm into a machine gun. In fact, in the last 50 years, no civilian has ever used a legally owned machine gun in a violent crime.
The guns banned under the 1994 bill are not the ones most frequently used in killing people. Despite the political rhetoric, semi-automatic rifles are rarely used in committing crime. Criminals nearly always choose handguns because they are more easily concealed. There is no factual basis for the case that a semi-automatic firearms ban stops gun violence or takes these guns out of the hands of criminals. In fact, 97% of police officials believe that criminals would still be able to obtain illegal weapons even if a ban on all rifles, shotguns, and handguns were enacted.
Although military-style weapons are given high-profile on the nightly news, a Justice Department study revealed they are used in less than 1% of all violent crimes. In fact, banning every type of semi-automatic firearm does not reduce the crime rate. Studies have repeatedly shown that states with the most restrictive gun control laws continue to show the highest rate of homicide per capita. Conversely, states with the least restrictive gun ownership laws have the lowest murder rates. Why? Because criminals do not obey gun laws.
Today, Americans own about 30 million semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns. Many people in the Eighth District of Ohio use the guns listed in the ban for a wide range of legitimate firearms purposes including self-defense, hunting, recreational and competitive target shooting, and collecting. In the days leading up to the vote in 1994 on the semi-automatic firearms ban, I received an overwhelming number of calls and letters from my constituents who use the banned guns for these purposes. Outlawing semi-automatic firearms only restricts the ability of law-abiding citizens to purchase these guns for their legitimate personal use.
During the debate of this issue in the House of Representatives, I was reminded of the television scenes from the Los Angeles riots where Asian store owners were forced to defend themselves and their property from the crazed mobs bent on looting their property. Many of the store owners used semi-automatic weapons. If this ban had been in effect then, these law-abiding property owners would have been left without protection to the ravages of the lawless mob. Instead of taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding Americans, we should get tough on criminals by enforcing the laws already on the books, including stiffer penalties for crimes committed with guns.
Thank you again for contacting me regarding this important issue. Please continue to keep me informed of your concerns.
This kind of understanding of the RKBA is the quintessence of what we are seeking in a politician. Too bad they're all not this well-informed.
My position with a major telecom provider has become...
Tenuous.
Layoffs are being announced. I am unsure of my status; indeed, they will not even tell us when they are making decisions about layoffs.
I have been doing quite solid work for these people for the last 1.6 years, but am aware that my lack of seniority may be a predominant factor in my potential dismissal. My numerous successes and my energy and drive may counteract this - we shall see.
In any case, such potential change brings new opportunities to Yours Truly.
Faithful reader(s), you will get the word when I get the nod - or the thumbs down. In any case, whatever may come, I will be off to a bright future. Thus is the spirit of optimism, born of my own revelation of the nature of our existence that I had in fall of '04. I cast aside my fears and became hopeful, and only then did the world of opportunity and joy become apparent to me.
Remember the '80's phrase, "coyote ugly?"
Amongst young men of that era, you used to use that term to describe when you'd strapped on the beer goggles, eyeballed what looked like a promising young female, went to her place and "did the deed." When you woke up sober and saw what you'd done, you'd rather chew your own arm off than chance waking her.
Thus the term - like any coyote in a trap would do.
Well, it seems that Remington, Inc., has "woken up" and discovered that Jim Zumbo is indeed "coyote ugly," as they have severed their relationship with him.
This begs another Photochop job. Perhaps I will take this on later after work.
I have not been blogging for a while, because I have been distracted, having moved away from the sunny 'hood of Aurora to the far friendlier plains of Frederick, where life is much more bucolic and rather quiet. However, something has come up which has tweaked my creative bug:
Jim Zumbo, Mr. Big Deal Hunter-type over at Outdoor Life, went on a tear Saturday on his blog.
As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington, and several writers. We're testing Remington's brand new .17 cal Spitfire bullet on coyotes.
I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of AR and AK rifles have a rapidly growing following among hunters, especially prairie dog hunters. I had no clue. Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these firearms.
I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles. (emphasis mine) They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are "tackdrivers."
Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I've always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our "sporting firearms."
This really has me concerned. As hunters, we don't need the image of walking around the woods carrying one of these weapons. To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing. (emphasis mine) Let's divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the praries (sic) and woods.
Well, you might guess what the reaction was by the guys over at ARFCOM, a website where devotees of a certain Evil Black Rifle hang out. There are five or more threads, with some running close to 80 pages and 1000 responses of ARFCOM members raising all sorts of trouble. There's even a "Photochop" contest, where entrants are encouraged to "redirect their creative energies" (there's a Social-Progressive-schoolteacher saying for ya) into funny and biting photos of Our Fuddite Zumbo.
Here's my contribution:
I have railed on the Fuddites before - you know, in this post, for instance, but this guy deserves a special, separate post just for being the Fudd that he is. It looks like his oversize feet, which are now firmly ensconced in his oversize mouth, may be taking a walk (there's a mental image for you) when Tuesday comes, as the CEO of Remington, who sponsors this twit's blog, is likely to pull his support. Zumbo's own blog has now received in excess of 2700 angry, bitter, sarcastic, and dead-on responses. His apology, which seems "Clintonesque" at best, is more about his displeasure of getting caught shitting on the freedoms ALL members of the hunting and shooting community enjoy.
Thanks, Fuddite! Thanks for the black eye! Your buddies in the Democratic National Committee and over at the so-called "Violence Policy Center" are already taking your lead, and commenting positively about your colossally-stupid post. You know that stinging pain you feel right between your eyes?
That's what it feels like to be a "useful idiot."
