Libercontrarian

Sunday, 31 October 2004

This Rifle Defended Your Freedom!

I took my Garand out of the case today. I still can't believe how beautiful that rifle is. I have created a National Match shooter of rare and special beauty and accuracy; with handloads the rifle goes into 3/4" @ 100 yards. Not bad for a 62 year-old autoloading .30 cal rifle!

This rifle doesn't simply represent a great National Match piece, or a cool benchrest toy, or the Armchair Commando's prize posession, but rather it is an icon and a reminder to me of the terrible struggle that was won not by Nazi Supermen or Soldiers of the Empire of Japan, but by dog-tired plumbers from Detroit, skinny Jewish kids from the Bronx, corn-fed boys from Indiana, and enterprising scientists at the University of Chicago.

It is a living testament to their struggle, the struggle of the Citizen Soldiers of this Nation against totalitarianism in WWII, in our current war, and in wars past. It is a living signpost that reminds us that America is a country that is slow to anger, quick to forgive, suspicious of intolerance and unwilling to be guided by religious zealotry, and that she is the best place in the world to make your voice heard, to work for a successful life and to simply be free. It also serves as a dark reminder of both the cost of freedom and the price extracted from its enemies - fuck with us and you will see the business end of this rifle, Osama.

Photos follow below:

posted by: underwhelmed at October 31, 2004 08:11 | link | comments (3) |

Saturday, 30 October 2004

"When Liberals Attack" new to blogroll

Folks, I've added the source of the post below to my blogroll. Go to "When Liberals Attack" to see the many unhappy hijinks of a party in its death throes.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 30, 2004 23:23 | link | comments (1) |

What happens when you have the temerity to oppose the Left

Things are getting violent.

If you haven't been to "When Liberals Attack," you should go. Now. I'm just wondering if Michael Moore's cameras he is reputed to be installing at polling places will faithfully record the beam in the eye of the Democratic Party's Leftist Bullying (an old tradition dating back to the strong-arm labor union days of the late 19th century) while searching for the mote in the eye of anticipated Republican Bullying.

Somehow, I doubt it - I am thinking that such troubling, self-convicting footage will end up in a digital cutting-room trash can.

Guys, if the American Left gets into power, do you think that they'll simply kick your shins like that college prof did to the student? I suspect that they will, with the mantle of government behind them, launch into a whole new use/abuse of power; it will be a Waco/Ruby Ridge on steroids, as they will finally be able to misuse such power to attack their political opponents. When I say "attack," I don't mean simply utilizing their friends in the media to make them look bad, I mean that they will employ their friends in the BATFE, the FBI, and if we don't come to heel, the Army.

If you think that I'm a moonbat for suggesting this, how many times has President Bush used violence against U.S. Citizens? How many times did President Clinton use violence?

What will happen if they try to intimidate you at the polling place?

posted by: underwhelmed at October 30, 2004 20:03 | link | comments (2) |

Friday, 29 October 2004

Guess it wasn't really the Mossad at all

To all the Muslim conspiracy theorists around the world who have wondered why the Mossad would partner up with the CIA to kill 2,973 Americans in the World Trade Center attacks, I give you this.

Osama says, "Welllll, I actually did it."

posted by: underwhelmed at October 29, 2004 20:15 | link | comments |

2973

Ruminate on this number for a while.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 29, 2004 19:29 | link | comments |

Pentagon PR release attendence at an all-time high

I noticed while watching Fox News' broadcast of a Pentagon public relations release that there were about 12 reporters in the room. I find it odd, usually when the Pentagon has something to say about the war in Iraq, the news outlets are there in force, shouting out leading questions, acting like 9th graders, etc. However, this time, the topic is one to make the agenda-driven MSM uncomfortable - it is a press release where a U.S. Army Major who is a specialist in ammunition management is telling the press about his involvement in the destruction of 200 tons of ammunition and explosives from the Al Qaqaa weapons storage facility. Apparently, the 200 tons are all that was there; visual survailence of the facility revealed photos of Saddam's people taking trucks into the facility days before and removing something.

The MSM is staying away from this story with the same fervor that they leapt on the initial Al Qaqaa/missing weapons issue. I guess that since it has done its damage to the Bush campaign effort, they are no longer under a burden to report the inconvenient truth that has now been revealed.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 29, 2004 08:46 | link | comments |

Thursday, 28 October 2004

This just in - bad hair day Bush's fault

(AP) - A Teaneck, NJ woman was embarrassed Tuesday during an inadvertent display of her head during ABC's morning production of "Good Morning America" in New York City. Amy Getterhall, 49, on vacation in the city, had just exited Starbucks, a coffee shop located in midtown Manhattan, when ABC "Good Morning America" Co-Host Bryant Gumble, in what is known as a "street feature," and his camera crew, inadvertently photographed Mrs.Getterhall after a considerable gust of wind disturbed her hairdo, sending many strands akimbo.

Friends of Mrs. Getterhall immediately recognized her image as they watched the widely-viewed broadcast, and were shocked to see her portrayed in such a compromising position. Mrs. Getterhall's sister, Candice Abrahmovitz, called Mrs. Getterhall on her cell phone and told her of the spectacle. "I was shocked - dismayed. I-I can't believe.." Mrs. Getterhall was unable to continue the interview.

A spokesman for the Getterhall Family, Attorney Alan Dershowitz, who has defended numerous high-profile clients in cases over the last 30 years, said, "Mrs. Getterhall - the entire Getterhall Family - these people have had their rights violated, and we intend on taking legal action against the Bush Administration for causing the conditions of this terrible situation to occur."

"Global Warming has changed weather patterns all over the globe, and the Bush Administration has failed to become a signer to the Kyoto Treaty, which was created and hand-written by Al Gore, the rightfully elected President of the United States. If his administration had been rightfully confirmed by the Supreme Court, President Gore would have signed the Kyoto Treaty and Global Warming would have ceased. Mrs. Getterhall, and the millions of Mrs. Getterhalls out there who don't have Alan Dershowitz to speak for them, wouldn't have experienced the embarrassment and the trauma of bad hair, hurricanes, or smog. The Bush Administration is going to have to pay for this."

While Bush Administration officials refused to comment on the topic, they say that the event will be investigated. The New York Times has promised to send a team of investigative reporters to Kyoto, The National Weather Service Headquarters in Sinclair, Oklahoma, and to Lá Institute de Predictión Weathier Internationale in Paris, France, to confirm Dershowitz's claim.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 28, 2004 10:00 | link | comments (2) |

Wednesday, 27 October 2004

Excellent quote

Just read an excellent quote in The Federalist Patriot: "[S]o long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." --Voltaire

posted by: underwhelmed at October 27, 2004 12:13 | link | comments (1) |

So what is government's role?

You have heard me rail against big government. You know of my mild paranoia with regard to its growth and intrusiveness, and I have complained about its desire to involve itself in the workplace, in daily affairs of individual citizens, and every two weeks with your paycheck. So what is its role? Does the Federal system merely exist to pave large, limited-access highways, check foreign aggression against our land and our citizens, and prevent kidnappers from crossing state lines?

I believe that there are more things that the government, and not any other entity, can do to keep the republic humming along and her citizens safe. Only the government, not market pressures, brought the automakers (who have been large multinationals since the 1920's) to heel with regards to clean air standards, mileage requirements, and safety innovations. Nobody, not even consumers, could have done this. What private enterprise would have risen to check Japanese, German, Soviet, and Islamofascist aggression? None, of course.

The good works that have been created with regulation of powerful corporations and the successful defense of our homeland have produced many unintended, undesirable consequences. Industries are fleeing our shores in pursuit of less expensive labor and less intrusive regulation. Those that remain are retail-oriented, low growth, and they cycle the money that they make far fewer times before it heads back to the bank in the form of profits. I sense that over-regulation is causing a large market shift that will be seen over the course of the next ten years, especially as the Chinese become more capable manufacturers of all things.

What do you do about it? Invent new industries, I guess. Unfortunately, the new industries are almost always retail-sector oriented - take eBay, for instance. It's growth is phenomenal, but I suspect that the ratio of the contribution to the U.S. economy will be tiny in comparison with traditional industries, if only because the end consumer becomes the second to last holder of profit, since many vendors on eBay are individuals, not corporations.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 27, 2004 09:43 | link | comments |

Tuesday, 26 October 2004

Part 3 of the Blog War

Earlier, I claimed that I wasn't excited to get into an intractable Blog War. I was wrong. It does excite me. I refuted a respondent's claims point-by-point, and really enjoyed it. Here's my response:

Frogsdong:
Nick, I don't need to go into why that catastrophic failure goes to the top. You seem like a smart guy. You can figure it out.Okay, okay, I'll sketch it. Insufficient troops to do the job, despite requests for more. They knew the weapons were there. The weapons had been put under seal by UN inspectors in 1991 and monitored ever since. when the troops got there in 2003, they checked and found the cache intact. Then they left because they didn't have the troops to secure it. They were busy elsewhere. So yes, the responsibility goes up the chain of command for fundamental errors. I won't even go into the bogus nature of the entire decision to start the war in the first place, but I will ask you this: are you feeling safer today with 380 tons of high-quality explosive missing?

Nick:
Uh, oh - we got us a THINKER! Well, at least you are making reasoned, intelligible arguments. Let's take things point by point, shall we?

1. Catastrophic failure occurred when the CIA and the other intelligence agencies COMPLETELY MISSED THE BOAT on the WMD issue. There's blame to spread all over the place on this one. Clinton's director, George Tenet, France's intelligence agency, the U.N., and everybody else on the planet said that Our Pal Saddam had WMDs. Everybody screwed up. George Bush DID COMPLETELY FORNICATE THE CANINE when he rushed up to war without any plan for creating a peaceful government (like an idiot, I supported him), and without enough troops to get the job done.

Compared to all that, losing 380 tons of explosives is a minor error.

Lincoln appointed I can't remember HOW MANY generals who lost hundreds of thousands of U.S. Troops in pointless engagements with the Confederates before he made progress with U.S. Grant. Roosevelt's administration was asleep at the switch in November of 1941 as the Japanese were preparing to rape and murder Pearl Harbor, and when it happened, they destroyed the career of Admiral Husband Kimmel and drove him to suicide, claiming that it was his fault. Again Roosevelt sent thousands of young men to death in rickety-ass Sherman tanks which were as useless as popguns against German Panzers. This kind of thing happens in war - you go with what you got, mistakes get made, and people die for them. It's not a tea party.

Blame goes to the top, alright, but tossing out a C-in-C during a shooting war is an unprecedented, foolish, myopic, and dangerous thing to do. It is tantamount to saying, "it's really OUR fault your country was supporting international terrorism, and we'll back down to you now. Come to our borders and kill our citizens again, please, we haven't had enough of it."

Frogsdong:
It is one thing to have people die in a war zone (that should never have been started, but was started because of bad judgment and ideology), and it is another bad judgment and incompetence to build upon itself until the supposedly "won" war is a complete fiasco.

Nick:
2. How much history have you studied, bro? War IS a complete fiasco! This is not some disorganized family Bar-B-Que we're talking about here; Iraq is a nation that was on the verge of collapse under a totalitarian's fist for about 30 years. These people don't know any other way of life - did you expect them to snap into "suburban housefrau mode" twelve seconds after we invaded their country, and tore away the apparatus of the state that both oppressed them and created what little order they've known?

Frogsdong:
80% of Afghanistan is currently under the control of the war lords and the Taliban. Lack of troops and US resolve lead to that defeat.

Nick:
3. Can you kindly quote the source on this phony-baloney 80% number? What happened in Afghanistan a week ago... hmmmm... elections? For the first time in, hmmm... FIVE THOUSAND YEARS? We've been defeated there? What the hell are you talking about?

Frogsdong:
...while the working folks and the poor made great economic strides under Clinton and it has all gone backwards under Bush. All of it. Poverty, wages, health care, job security, and foreign relations, all gone backwards under Bush. Go ahead, blame Iraq on Clinton. I can see you want to.

Nick:
4. Yeah, I was one of the over-employed working folks who made economic strides under Clinton - I was taking down $75 grand a year as a web designer, although I hadn't any talent out of the ordinary. It was called "the Tech Bubble." When it burst PRIOR TO CLINTON LEAVING OFFICE after the Democratic Party lawyered up in November 2000, I lost my job and have had to make a living in a different field. The signs of the crash were evident in winter and spring of 2000 to anyone paying attention. Clinton's ability to tell a shining lie rubbed off on false-hope speculators in the stock market. It was bound to collapse sooner or later.

Frogsdong:
Oh, and how many troops were lost in Serbia, just out of curiosity?

Nick:
5. The issue isn't how many troops were lost in Serbia, the issue is how many CIVILIANS Clinton's oddball application of air delivered munitions slaughtered. Remember those poor people that got killed in the subway car - it was like fifty there alone. Remember when we accidentally bombed the Chinese Embassy? Why weren't you calling for Clinton's resignation then; he screwed up, didn't he, and responsibility goes straight to the top, right? After all, they're a nuclear power - piss them off and you might find 4 million PLA soldiers drinking green tea in Yuba Linda, CA. Are you aware that North Korea's ability to manufacture their nuclear weapons came about as a result of Clinton's idiotic appeasment of Communists in 1994?

Frogsdong:
...we need someone else in charge, someone who has a record of competence instead of a lifelong record of failure.

Nick:
6. And that guy is John Kerry? Record of competence? Where? What legislation has this "someone else" (which is the best description of Kerry I can think of) has this guy sponsored? Where is his record of leadership? Other than his traitorous meetings with North Vietnamese officials during the Vietnam War, what is his record of international statesmanship?

Look, I'm not a big lover of George Bush. I don't think that he's a bad guy either. He is limited in scope (like every man who walks the earth), and unfortunately, his limitations are holding this country back. So who do you guys pick to run against him? Is it the first Democrat I may have ever voted for, Joe Lieberman, an honorable and decent man with the skills to do the job? No, you bozos put forth John Forbes Kerry, a traitor and an admitted war criminal! Given that choice, who in Christ's name do you think that I'm going to support?

Stand by for further developments.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 26, 2004 11:29 | link | comments |

Everything I've ever wanted to say to a Democrat

Yesterday, I told you about my rebuke to Sister Talk, a lefty blog. I'm not excited about the prospect of a blog war, like my friend Jheka sometimes gets into with the mental midgets at Democratic Underground. Such a thing is usually just as irresolvable as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which will still be going on when Jews and Arabs have evolved into tall, skinny, doe-eyed aliens.

Nevertheless, I, your Sergeant Major of the Armchair Commando Brigade of Aurora, Colorado soldiered forward, as you read yesterday. The "vicious screed" I was suspecting that I would read in response was somewhat less intelligently thought out than I imagined it would be. Some weird fugue state came over me, and I suddenly found myself pounding out a response which highlighted just about everything I've wanted to say to a die-hard Democratic Bush-hater from November 3rd, 2000. Here's the screed, and my response:
--------------------------------

Genia posts:Morally bankrupt? I'd laugh if that wasn't so blatantly hypocritical. My grandma always told me that folks should be cleanin' their own shitty toilets before they start messin' around in someone else's. Seems to me that the bank of morality is quite empty on your side of the river, Nick.

Let's see:

1. Bill O'Reilly and the sexual harassment he calls "stupid" not illegal

2. Rush Limbaugh and his drug problem, yet he preached up one wal and down the other about sending drug addicts to prison

3. Sinclair Broadcasting's top guy getting busted for prostitution

Should I go on, or does anyone else want to show Nick how low on funds his people are?

Then, G.D. Frogsdong(?) posts: Nick, 380 tons of HMX and RDX are missing in Iraq and likely are what is being used to blow up our troops.

Go worry about that first.
--------------------------
Here is my response:

I just love the whole lefty fixation on the "Bush had the nerve to say he wasn't that concerned about OBL!" thing you straw-men-makers love to create. It kind of reminds me of my own idiotic Clinton-bashing during impeachment. I probably sounded kind of like you guys sound now, frothing at the mouth, paranoid, raving...

You know, it's so easy to make fun of you guys; easier than making fun of the idiot Republicans that are spending us into the grave. You folks have to admit that your viewpoint is on the way out; that your side has lost ground in every election since 1994 (I'm not saying that this is a good thing; I shudder at the thought of an all-Republican government, unable to control its wild impulses with the Taxpayer Checkbook - kind of like your party would be, given the same opportunities).

If you dimwits in the Democratic Party don't get your shit together and start attracting candidates who are conservative but want to protect the interests of working people as opposed to corporations, those dirtbags and their high-falutin' buddies in Congress are going to turn us all into $8.00/hr wage slaves.

Keep supporting the lunatic causes - your side will continue to marginalize itself, destroying whatever limited legitimacy the Democratic Party has left in America.

You guys remember the Democratic Party, right? I'm not talking about the hippie-run, pot-smoking layabouts who so greatly influenced it after the Kerouac days of the 1950s, I mean the one that my grandmother voted for. You remember, right? The one that created the "Arsenal of Democracy" and the one that championed worker rights when big business was steadily beating the drum for longer work days and longer work weeks? The one that kept us from going "Red Crazy" before McCarthy's meltdown in the 1950's? Remember Roosevelt? Truman? Kennedy?

Whatever happened to you guys? Your best opportunity to become a legacy party, instead of a joke, was blown when southern redneck Democrats fought the Civil Rights movement in the early 60's. Don't think that I don't know that Byrd was a Klansman, or that Ernest "Fritz" Hollings didn't preside over the state house of South Carolina when they recognized the "heroism" of the Jim Crow Confederate Retreads by dignifying their opposition to integration with a brand new state flag - with the Stars and Bars on it! It was when your party tied its horse to Leftist Academia, bastard child of the failed Communist Party in America, that you spelled your death warrant. Following Stalin's purges, even committed American Communists grimaced in mortification. Moderate Americans with leftist leanings were, and wisely so, ARE repelled.

See, I was actually PAYING ATTENTION when you guys screwed the poodle - I know that you liberals count on people just accepting your altered versions of reality without question since you have essentially owned the means of conveying that "reality" to the American public for 60+ years. I pay attention when The Lesser of Two Evils tells us that the greatest country in history couldn't create the means necessary to discover whether or not a country the size of California is or is not manufacturing death in factories. I pay attention when rights get violated under the auspices of the Patriot Act, and I will be paying attention if the government (whichever "side" is running things) comes to collect any innocent citizens falsely accused who are denied their constitutional rights.

Oh, and "Genia," you can hardly compare Bill O'Reilly's groping of a boob here or there with Bill Clinton's covering up his groping of a boob and his unfortunate blue-dress emission with his BOMBING OF A COUNTRY so that he could distract a nation from stories of these peccadilloes. It is just this kind of MORALLY BANKRUPT argument that I would expect from the American Left, shallow, weak-kneed, and truly pathetic. I guess that you "really showed me how low on funds" that "my people" (who are they, again?) are.

Duh.

Oh, and "G.D. Frogsdong," I guess that the Commander in Chief is personally responsible when Bad Things Happen in a war zone, right? I guess that, in a Kerry-run war, nobody'd get hurt, Islamic terrorists wouldn't occasionally get a victory, and Iraq's reconstruction would be completed in 42 minutes plus commercials, right? Kinda like that whole Ross-Rachel thing got cleared up in the last episode of "Friends?"

That's just some weak sauce, dude. Really, are these two the best you guys can do? Analyze why an accusation of us attacking Iran "to keep Bush in office" is so ridiculous and you will truly discover why a tiny majority of American voters, a majority that grows ever larger year by year, has determined your views to be invalid and proves it to you with results at the ballot box. Watch with dismay as it happens again in under two weeks. Only then will you truly begin to understand that your world views are not based in reality, and you will need to undergo some personal introspection to discover what is wrong with you!
---------------------------

The opportunity to say these things to some fairly leftist people was a tonic to my soul. It looks like G.D. Frogsdong has replied intelligently to my post, which I will address shortly. Genia bailed out, much like I figured.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 26, 2004 09:34 | link | comments |

Monday, 25 October 2004

Left wing conspiracy theorists receive rebuke

I occasionally poke around on the Other Side of the River of Division of political thought we have in this country. Why? I like to go slumming occasionally. It's good to see what the losing side is currently frothing at the mouth about.

I was at "Sisters Talk," a leftist blogger of no renown, who's site is a triumph of fear-mongering and hate speech. Her and her readers are assured that Bumbling George and his staff of murderers will "launch an attack that will reduce Rock Ridge (Iran) to ashes," presumably to halt the "rightful" election of John Kerry.

Why are people on the left so assured of the evil of government when they're not running the show? Because THEY'RE NOT RUNNING THE SHOW, that's why! When they're in, they expand the government and intrude upon your rights, demand more in taxes for their pet projects, and threaten the country's existence with appeasements of evil.

Witness the non-performance in this field during the 8-year Clinton administration's reign: the attack on the barracks in Saudi Arabia, the first WTC attack in '93, the attacks on the embassies in Africa, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and Saddam's ten-year history of shooting at U.S. warplanes patrolling the No-Fly-Zones, culminating in a tour-de-force performance of our enemies on September 11, 2001.

And we're supposed to trust them? Why would anybody who is concerned about the safety of his country ever vote for a Democrat?

Here was my response to this post:

I'm glad to see that reason and enlightenment is alive and well on the liberal side of the River of Division we have in our country.

Suppositions that we would attack a soverign nation to influence, stifle, and distract political debate are simply....

historical.

Yes, I seem to recall something about this...

Oh, yeah, we attacked an asprin factory in Sudan the SAME DAY that our wonderful president Clinton was geting his impeachment hearing voted on in Congress.

Clinton also attacked the Serbian nation, a country that did not attack the USA or Israel.

You morally bankrupt wonders of the American Left managed not to criticise and pontificate on the vagaries of THAT little Tail That Wagged The Dog.

I am waiting to see what vicious screed will be posted in response...

posted by: underwhelmed at October 25, 2004 08:41 | link | comments |

So you think that you've got money troubles?

I was reading Chrenkoff's blog about the "Good News From Iraq," and I came across this part:

A Maine resident, meanwhile, is helping Iraqi chldren through sports: "Alan Johnston, a soccer referee in central Maine, recently helped outfit a small band of Iraqi children with soccer balls, T-shirts and shorts after watching kids playing with rocks and metal cans." Johnson, who was employed in Iraq as private security contractor, saw during his travels around the country Iraqi children trying to play soccer in the most difficult of circumstances. He says: "They would play soccer in an open area of dirt and use rocks for goals or (use) pieces of pipe sticking up from the ground... The kids played in their bare feet and would kick anything they could find that would roll." The report continues: "The children struck a chord with Johnston, who played high school soccer in Greenville and is a high school, college and youth referee. His own children played soccer at Erskine Academy in South China. Johnston contacted Carol Woodcock, executive director of Soccer Maine, who sought out vendors to provide soccer balls, T-shirts and shorts.

"Shipments began arriving last spring and were erratic because Johnston didn't stay in the same place for too long. But he finally had everything in hand last month, and he began doling out the equipment on Sept. 27. Under heavy guard, Johnston went to a dump where he had observed many of the local children scavenging for anything usable and distributed his treasure trove of 48 sets of shorts and T-shirts and 22 soccer balls. 'The kids were ecstatic and they came running from all over,' he said. 'It seemed like (they) were crawling out from under rocks. We had a hard time to control them and get them into a line so I could give (the equipment) out'."

Next time you complain because you have a shitty 19" TV for entertainment instead of a widescreen 52" plasma TV, or because your Nike's are two years old and you can't afford to buy the most recent style, or your crummy job pays you so little that you can't pay off all your bills on your first month's check, try and remember what these kids had to go through. They were playing soccer IN THEIR BARE FEET KICKING AROUND ROCKS, fer Christsakes!

We have it pretty damned-good here in America; and even when times look tough, at least you can count on your ability to get to work without a car bomb blowing up next to your place of employment, or having some religious wacko pouring hate into your head 24-seven to get you to perform "acts of martyrdom."

posted by: underwhelmed at October 25, 2004 06:04 | link | comments |

Sunday, 24 October 2004

Libercontrarian gets a new gun, speaks on the Winchester and Remington Crowd

While the Beatles jested that "Happiness Is a Warm Gun," I happen to think that happiness is really a cold gun - one that hasn't yet been fired. I will be procuring such a firearm tomorrow, having successfully sold my DPMS AR-15 to a citizen (and fellow patriot) of the state of Louisiana. I have decided to purchase a JLD-PTR-91.308 battle rifle, an "EBR," as it is euphemistically known in the modest circle of gun enthusiasts that like such implements. The Winchester and Remington Crowd, with their polished bolt guns, their $40,000+ pickups, and their cadre of hunting buddies will inevitably sneer at me when I enter the pristine environ of their rifle range with my ugly new toy, which will (hopefully) put several holes very, very closely together in a tidy little group.

I must admit that I enjoy the look of discomfort they get when they realize that someone of my "ilk" is in their midst. The Winchester and Remington Crowd, erstwhile hunters they be, aren't what I would call "real gun owners." They can be characterized by their lack of involvement in the Way of the Gun:

a. If you ask one of the W&RC what caliber their rifle is chambered in, they'll bumble the response - then blurt out that it's a "deer rifle."

b. They will tell you all about how they paid maximum markup on a tree-stand from Cabela's, which seems to me to be a bit of a chicken-shit way of hunting deer anyhow. I don't hunt, don't want to, don't begrudge REAL hunters that aren't concerned with how many "points" a buck has, and think that if you do hunt, you should take your lazy, middle-aged ass into the woods and TRACK a deer, if you can. I think tree stand hunting - especially BAITED tree-stand hunting, is unsporting. If you just want to hang out in the woods with your big-shot friends away from your controlling wives for a week, simply go camping. There's plenty of food at the Safeway that you won't have to skin.

c. Ask one of these turkeys who they're voting for, and they'll pipe up, "Kerry!" 'Nuff said. That guy's the King of the W&RC. Did you witness the fate of that poor duck that a competent hunter probably had to down for Kerry? That goof, running around with his $1,500 Browning Citori...

d. If they've paid over $35,000 for a pickup, they're either insane to take it into the woods, or it's as much of an adornment as their Weatherby Magnum rifle that could down a bull elephant. You don't need that shit for eastern woods deer, and unless you're Carlos Hathcock, you shouldn't be shooting at game more than a couple hundred yards away. At that range, virtually any rifle will do the job. It is also unlikely that the twelve beers that you have consumed will permit you to take the several necessary steps to be able to accurately shoot that gun, especially when you keep tugging at the trigger with the safety on, and you are forced not to drunkenly wobble as you "steady" the rifle in preparation for the once-in-a-season shot at that big buck.

e. I freely admit that I am an Armchair Commando. This is OK. I don't lug my $1,200 rifle into the woods, wear ridiculous colors, drink with my fellow idiot job-exporting CEOs, lawyers, or city councilmen, bitch about my wife's post-menstrual syndrome, and take potshots at whatever snapping noises my state of inebriation causes me to believe I heard in the trees. As Sergeant Major of the Armchair Commando Brigade of Aurora, Colorado, I feel compelled to:

1. look at my $1,000 rifle, not show it to other people (reminds me too much of Oswald, I'll never pose holding a firearm),
2. take it to the range, shoot some tight groups with it,
3. clean it religiously, and,
4. pray to Christ that I never have to use the damnned thing to defend my home, my city, or my nation against threats foreign and domestic.

I am a gun owner. I am also a member of the NRA. I am proud of my status as Sergeant Major of the Armchair Commando Brigade of Aurora, Colorado, and vow to keep my tiny, niggardly little arsenal in clean working order so that someday, when I roach out, they can pile those guns into the casket with me and I can be well-armed for eternity. Throw cartridges over my grave, waste not the beautiful lilies of the field.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 24, 2004 21:41 | link | comments |

Friday, 22 October 2004

Dictator takes a tumble

I don't normally experience joy when witnessing an 80-year old take a fall. Indeed, such a tumble could signal the end of life for the over-70 set. However, in this case, I had to chuckle - when a guy like this is responsible for oppressing, enslaving, and murdering people, and when he has put my country under the gravest threat of nuclear attack, I at least get a little kick in the pants.

Hope it hurt, ass-hat!

(thanks to AFP for the photo)
South Florida Sun-Sentinel reporters Vanetta Bauza and Madeline Baro write:

In South Florida, where television news stations repeatedly aired the video clip of Castro's tumble, many Cuban-Americans reacted with amusement and glee.

On Spanish-language radio, one listener joked that this must have been what President Bush was talking about when he referred to the fall of Castro in a speech not long ago. One radio host, after mentioning that Castro had to get a cast, alluded to the Cuban leader's penchant for marathon speeches saying "they should put a cast on his tongue."

While some placed little significance on the incident, others saw deeper meaning in it.

Radio host and Cuban exile activist Ninoska Perez Castellon said the episode was symbolic of the deterioration of Cuba.

"It's just so much of a reflection of what the Cuban revolution is," she said. "Here is this 78-year-old man still dressed in fatigues as if he were a guerilla leader ... falling, just like the rest of the country is falling apart."

The Bush administration, which has tightened the four-decade economic embargo against Cuba, declined to speculate on Castro's health or wish him a speedy recovery on Thursday.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 22, 2004 09:02 | link | comments |

Monday, 18 October 2004

Adopt-A-Sniper

The title of this post may cause you to question my sanity; nevertheless, there is such an organization. It was created by police snipers here in the U.S.; they correctly suspected that their Army and Marine Corps brothers in the field have not been given the gear needed for the rapid expansion of the sniper cadre in the Iraqi theater. What I have read is that the counter-insurgency war in Iraq is a sniper's war - terrorists blend into crowds and use cityscapes and city-dwellers to shield themselves from the accurate weapons systems that we can call upon in the modern battlefield environment, making such attacks worthless. Snipers must therefore interdict these insurgents with accurate, sustained rifle fire so as to obviate or minimize civilian casualties.

As is the usual case, we were all prepared for the last war, GW1, with our Abram's Main Battle Tanks, our Stryker Brigades and our laser guided bombs, but the battlefield has changed on us. Such lack of preparedness happened in February of 1943 at the Kasserine pass. Then it happened in the skies over North Korea, where we brought in lumbering, propeller-driven B-29s from WWII that suffered high losses under the guns of more advanced Mig-15 jets. Again it happened numerous times in the jungles of Vietnam, where we tried to employ equipment and tactics oriented to fight potential Soviet Armored Divisions that were far better suited to the open country of the German Fulda Gap.

This war is a Sniper War (you have GOT to read this article). That tiny community of men has now been stretched thin in the Iraqi theatre. In response, many units, just like in WWI and WWII, are taking the best riflemen out of their platoons and handing them sniper weapons systems, giving them training in the environment, and employing them to shoot down terrorists. The fate of the war on terror probably lies in the hands of a couple-thousand good shooters - shots that ring out of nowhere are effective weapons against the insurgents, demoralizing them and destroying their will to fight. There are seldom collateral casualties, unlike the use of air-delivered Precision-Guided-Munitions. It is likely that these people will be the most effective weapon against the insurgents in Iraq, but they can hardly get the job done if they don't have the gear to make it happen.

These men are ill-equipped, and need our help. I implore you to go to their website and read some of the letters these thankful young men have written to their benefactors, and donate some gear or a little money to their cause.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 18, 2004 08:39 | link | comments (1) |

The Welcome Death of Liberalism

You know, Liberalism has passed away (thank God) - The reason why I am happy about its demise is because liberals (Thomas Jefferson, George Madison, and the like) and their ideologies have finally defeated the ideas of Monarchism and have become the new standard, at least here in the United States. It is dead because it has become our way of life, so there is no longer any need for a movement. It grew up, became old, accomplished its mission in 1965, and has passed gently away. No longer do we look down at someone because of their gender or their skin color, rather, it is the quality of their ideas that causes us to evaluate their natures, and make rational conclusions based upon the outcomes of the applications of those ideas to real life.

Modern "Liberalism" is a misnomer - the word to accurately describe the concept of the modern leftist movement is Socialism. Socialism is the weak form of Communism (which is merely Socialism after a violent struggle to steal the wealth-making machinery from its owners and inventors), and is a utopianistic philosophical belief in the goodness of the human spirit which denies real human nature. It is not a philosophy based in reality, therefore, I suspect that many Socialists are only marginally sane people. Do you remember the mass arrests outside the Republican National Convention when the peace-loving Hippies turned violent? One of them nearly beat a police officer to death. Such action, and the subsequent covering for the assailant, weren't the acts of rational people.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 18, 2004 07:38 | link | comments |

Saturday, 16 October 2004

Why Kerry might win, and why that may be a good thing

I was analyzing some poll results today - Kerry has regained the lead in several key battleground states that were, pre-debates, leaning solidly towards Bush. If a couple of states fall into the purple patch, tending toward blue, then a Democrat may be in the Whitehouse for the second time in half a decade.

So why would this be a good thing?

Remember my Libercontrarian point of view - government, which has grown under the expansionist ways of the Republican Party like weeds in high summer, would be effectively crippled by a Kerry Presidency. By all appearances, the House will maintain a solid majority of Republican Congressmen, and the Senate looks like it could shift in that more "conservative" direction itself. With Congress firmly in the hands of the Republicans, and the Whitehouse in the hands of the Democrats, there's an excellent possibility of the legislative and executive branches locking one another into a Sisyphean contest of wills, unable to grow, to make new, useless laws, to get into any more wars, or to restrict your rights any further.

I like this idea - government crippled into inaction by opposing ideologies, and regular folk going about their business without interference. This is just the plan for a healthy economy, although it may stunt our approach to the War on Terror and make us vulnerable again, as leaders would be unable to dedicate their efforts to keeping us safe from enemies foreign and domestic.

Oh wait - they weren't doing that in the first place since they let our southern border become completely and utterly porous. Hmmm. Now what?

posted by: underwhelmed at October 16, 2004 22:06 | link | comments (2) |

Althouse raises question

Althouse raised an excellent question in her post this morning about Kerry's accent - he is trying to cover his upper crust New England roots, but has let them peek through every now and then. She says that she would admire Kerry if he just used his native High English instead of trying, unsuccessfully, to sound like the rest of us, and that he sounds strung out and weird: "If he would just be his authentic self, an upper class guy, trying to serve, being thoughtful and adult, I would probably love him. But he's been twisted and wrung out by the process." To tell you the truth, I can't fault him for that - he's near the end of a long and bitter campaign. Most folks under that kind of stress would have cracked months ago, so if some guy bumbles the pronunciation of "brat," you won't find me greatly disturbed.

I still won't be voting for him; I am admittedly (nearly, anyway) a single-issue voter. Kerry's as anti-gun as it gets, and I couldn't stomach becoming any more marginalized than I was for eight years during the reign of the Clintons.

posted by: underwhelmed at October 16, 2004 21:25 | link | comments |

Reporter with gun not a target

Just seen on Fox News - Former U.S. Army Special Forces Major Bob Bevelacqua, a Fox News reporter, is on scene in Iraq - and he's armed with a folding-stock AK-47 Kalashnikov (I suspect that it is an AK-103).Former USMC Lt. Colonel Bill Cowan also appeared live in New York on The Big Story Weekend Edition with Rita Cosby, and showed footage of himself in Iraq holding what appeared to be a under-folding-stock Kalashnikov rifle, probably an RPK. This caused me to laugh; Allah Save any insurgent moron who comes up against one of these well-armed, well-trained reporters. Cowan has a particularly interesting career; he spirited Americans out of Kuwait in 1990 as a private citizen at the behest of the Federal Government when the Iraqi Army attacked and took over that defenseless country.

In WWII, many combat camera men and reporters put down their cameras and typewriters and joined the in the fight; the landings at Tarawa immediately come to mind. I find these to be remarkable people - they wish to bring us the news, and will put their very lives in jeopardy to make it happen. How else are we to understand the cost of the war in Iraq and the many issues that are confronting the people trying to get on with their lives there?

On an odd side note, Mrs. Libercontarian has been telling me for years that she went to high school in Greenwich, CT (Bubbleville) with Fox News Reporter Rita Cosby. I've never really believed her, but we recently returned to Bubbleville to visit her family and retrieve stuff stored there for 10 years, and when she showed me her high school yearbook, she turned to the page with "C" last names, and there was a young Rita Cosby! Needless to say, I was surprised.

About me

Links

Counter