Such professionals the President has chosen

to do his work.

Confronting the head of a non-TARP fund holding Chrysler debt and unwilling to release it for any sum less than that to which it was legally entitled without compelling cause, this country's "Car Czar" berated the manager of said fund with an outburst of prose substantially resembling this:

Who the fuck do you think you're dealing with? We'll have the IRS audit your fund. Every one of your employees. Your investors. Then we will have the Securities and Exchange Commission rip through your books looking for anything and everything and nothing we find to destroy you with.

Yeah, how DARE they try to actually get their customers what they are owed? Don't they know that messes with Pres. B. Cartman Obama's plans?

Speaking of politicians(and their dirty little minions) who need the application of a whipping post

in the town square, two cases Insty pointed to. First, in California,
Tomorrow I will be arguing the case of Griswold v. City of Carlsbad in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California. This is an astonishing case in which city officials forced the Griswold family to give up their constitutionally protected right to vote in exchange for a building permit. Hard as that might be to believe, it is actually not unique: it's actually quite common for local governments to abuse permits by forcing property owners to give up money or land or other rights.
This is... 'disgusting' isn't the word, but it's close. Any politician and/or bureaucrat playing at this should be removed from office. And prosecuted, if at all possible.

Second, from Illinois(somehow not surprising),
"Along a party line vote, the Quincy City Council denied a written request to speak by a taxpaying resident of the city.

Steve McQueen, one of the organizers of the Quincy Tea Party effort, requested to speak on the recently approved $31.2 million budget and water and sewer rate increases.

When it came time to vote to open the floor to allow the speaker, a mixed voice vote took place. A roll call vote ensued and the seven Democrats denied McQueen's opportunity to speak while six Republicans voted to allow him to speak.

Alderman Mike Rein (R-5th Ward) was absent.

Alderman Mike Farha (R-4th Ward) said he had never seen anyone denied the right to speak in his 10 years on the council and called the vote "outrageous.""
Response from the mayor?
Quincy Mayor John Spring says he has no regrets about a City Council vote which denied a taxpaying citizen to opportunity to speak before the city's governing body on Monday night.

Spring appeared on WGEM-FM (105.1) during NewsTalk Drive, hosted by Les Sachs on Tuesday afternoon. Sachs asked about Monday night's meeting and Spring said the events made him 'sad'.

"The main focus of the meeting was supposed to have been a very special night for those council members, mayor and other elected officials who were there to be sworn in to serve...," said Spring, who is the mayor. "Unfortunately, that got a little overshadowed as I noticed in the coverage. Today, there wasn't much said about that...so that's sad. That's a very sad thing in my mind that Quincy deserved better than that."
To borrow from Tam, "Ooooh, who's a sad clown?"
"I didn't think that was appropriate...for that group from that standpoint to come and basically disrupt that ceremony," Spring said.

McQueen had about 40 supporters at City Hall, who did nothing to disrupt any ceremony, which Spring admitted in the interview.(bold mine)

Gee, I think the tea party and people speaking out kind of bother this little roach, don't they?

And last, the Justice Department, if it wants that name to be anything other than a joke, needs a serious housecleaning:
It appears John Yoo cannot be disciplined or disbarred for writing those memos, even if the Office of Professional Responsibility says it has evidence he should be.

That’s because OPR’s five-year investigation—carefully timed for release only as Bush was leaving the White House and Obama was coming in—dragged on too long. As a result of that timing, OPR blew the deadline for referring possible misconduct allegations against Yoo.

John Yoo is admitted to the bar in Pennsylvania. But the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board, which would investigate any complaints against him, imposes a four-year limitation for complaints.

Yoo wrote the memos in 2002 and 2003. This is 2009. You do the math....

This is a huge issue for current DOJ officials and Attorney General Eric Holder. Because if Yoo—who wrote the memos and has been vilified as responsible for approving the interrogation program—can’t be disciplined under state bar rules, why then would OPR even refer the matter to state bar officials in the first place?

And what about Bybee? Now a federal appeals court judge, Bybee is admitted in DC and Nevada—those jurisdictions don’t have comparable limitations periods. But how strange would it be to only refer Bybee, when his involvement largely amounted making a few edits and signing Yoo’s legal work?

I spent part of the day helping a friend try out a new design

That's Oren*, and the shiny can on the end of the barrel is the prototype of the suppressor design he's worked out. The expression is due to asking the dog what the hell it's doing(no, it did not pee on my leg). It(the can, not the dog) weighs a touch over six ounces, and it works.

As in, with subsonic ammo, the shot itself was a mild 'tick', much quieter than the sound of the bullet striking the target and backstop fifteen yards away; downright impressive. Yes, I want one when he's able to start producing them.

So the day was spent trying this out, talking and helping him take care of some things. Time well spent, I'd say.

*Had a question in comments, thought I'd add this: he's a NFA-licensed gunsmith(link above and on the sidebar), and yes, he had the license before he even put pen to paper

I just have to note that John Murtha(Despised Clown-PA)

has not apologized to the Marines he slandered and lied about. And probably never will, even though it keeps being proved what a damned liar he is.
A government official has informed the Thomas More Law Center that the government will not seek to appeal the recent unanimous decision by the Navy Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (NMCCA) in favor of LtCol Jeffrey Chessani, USMC.

The decision makes permanent the ruling by the trial court judge, Colonel Steven A. Folsom, USMC, dismissing the charges against LtCol Chessani, without prejudice, due to Unlawful Command Influence. The government could have sought an appeal to the civilian Court of Appeals of the Armed Forces (CAAF), and then to the U.S. Supreme Court.

You'd think, if the bastard had any sense of honor at all, he'd say SOMETHING, but he won't. Wouldn't surprise me if he's still accusing them of horrors, just more quietly than before.

Yep, we're all covered!

Alternate media, militia, distrustful of politicians, and other horrible things. Which makes me one of those domestic extremists(more commonly known asto the GFW politicians and bureaucrats) according to a 'maverick' division of DHS. Maverick, hmmm...

Get the feeling that 'maverick' might mean "You idiots! You weren't supposed to let the public know this is what we're putting out!"?

Two pieces on our current 'smart diplomacy'

Since when is it smart to ignore a threatening country making airstrikes in your territory?
Iranian aircraft attacked three villages inside Iraq over the weekend. The airstrikes — Iran’s first on Iraqi soil since the U.S. invasion — could complicate the Obama administration’s efforts to normalize relations with Tehran.
As Insty says, you think maybe?

Second, just how friggin' smart is it to hold Israel responsible for Iran's nuclear weapons program?
According to the Jerusalem Post: Thwarting Iran’s nuclear program is conditional on progress in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. [bold mine]
Such smart effing people we've got running this stuff, what?

William Bratton may have been a fine cop once,

but it seems he's been corrupted by all that time around politicians.
In the wake of all this, some LAPD officers are asking their superiors for clarified guidelines on when illegal-alien arrestees should be reported to ICE. Clearly, Mayor Villaraigosa and his sycophants in the LAPD want to restrict such notifications to only the most serious of offenders. In fact, in an e-mail sent out to some officers in the LAPD’s South Bureau last week, Commander Andrew Smith, the assistant commanding officer for the bureau, said the subject of ICE notification had come up in a recent senior staff meeting. “The direction given by [Chief William Bratton],” wrote Smith, “is that we call ICE only on the following cases: 1) Violent felony arrestees, and 2) Gang members arrested for felony charges.”

So if Bratton were to have his way, burglars, car thieves, drug dealers, forgers, drunk drivers, and all manner of other miscreant illegal aliens would go unreported to ICE unless they belonged to a gang. And an illegal-alien gang member, presumably even one with a felony record, would go unreported when arrested for a misdemeanor. I have yet to see any formal order codifying the guidelines set forth in the e-mail, and I’m at a loss to figure out how Bratton might issue such an order without running afoul of state and federal law.
Well, considering all the time that illegal-loving mayor & co. spend saying they're going to ignore the law, what makes you think they care? is the question.

Uh, guys? You can't pass on your genes

with target selection skills like this.
But as the Somali pirates sped toward the vessel sailing near the Seychelles, they were horrified to see two boats and a helicopter set off from their target and launch their own counter-attack.

They had failed to spot, in the dazzling sun, that the ‘merchant ship’ they thought they were intercepting was, in fact, a French naval ship bristling with cannons, radar technology and armed commandos.

With all the crap you've stolen over the past while, there were no sunglasses? Hmmm?

If you're one of those folks who wonder why we don't trust them

when they say "We don't want to take your guns!", take a look at two things:
First, how the Brady Gun Ban people wanted to define 'arsenal':

Section 204 -

Prohibits a person from possessing more than 20 firearms or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition unless the person is a licensed dealer or has been issued an arsenal license. Direct the Secretary of the Treasury to issue such a license if specified conditions are met, including the payment of a $300 fee for a three-year license period. Subjects the holder of such a license to all requirements pertaining to licensed dealers. Sets penalties for violations.

Followed by, as the definition of a 'firearm',

SEC. 312. DEFINITION OF FIREARM EXPANDED TO INCLUDE COMPONENT PARTS.

Section 921(a)(3)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
striking "or receiver" and inserting ", receiver, barrel, stock, ammunition
magazine, or any part of the action".
(bold added)

So, if you had three actual guns, and three magazines each, and a few boxes of ammo; or just a couple of boxes of ammo and some spare parts- extractors, ejector, springs- you have an 'arsenal' and would require a license. Or if you have a couple of .22 rifles and two bricks of ammo. A license for which the requirements and cost could be jacked up constantly to cause people to give up. On top of that, just think of all the crap that has been used by bad agents at BATFE to screw over dealers being used on you("You don't have these magazines stored properly, that'll cost you your license! And you'll be lucky if you don't face charges!").

And if there's any question in your mind what the Brady Gun-Ban group actually wants,
I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, "This is a great law. The problem is solved." And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.

Thanks to Thirdpower for pointing to these quotes.

Do YOU need more exercise? More stability in your scattergun

for those moving targets? A new way to pour out your moneyA way to shoot a whole round of skeet without reloading? We present
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like she says, just because you can do it...

Two very disturbing things about Harold Koh:

First, which explains a lot about the mess the country is in, this dickhead was the Dean of Yale Law School.
Second, President B. Cartman Obama wants said dickhead to be the bigshot legal guy in the State Department.
What would this look like in a practical sense? Well, California voters have overruled their courts, which had imposed same-sex marriage on the state. Koh would like to see such matters go up the chain through federal courts -- which, in turn, should look to the rest of the world. If Canada, the European Human Rights Commission and the United Nations all say gay marriage should be legal -- well, then, it should be legal in California too, regardless of what the state's voters and elected representatives might say.

He even believes judges should use this "logic" to strike down the death penalty, which is clearly permitted in the US Constitution.

The primacy of international legal "norms" applies even to treaties we reject. For example, Koh believes that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child -- a problematic document that we haven't ratified -- should dictate the age at which individual US states can execute criminals. Got that? On issues ranging from affirmative action to the interrogation of terrorists, what the rest of the world says, goes.

Including, apparently, the world of radical imams. A New York lawyer, Steven Stein, says that, in addressing the Yale Club of Greenwich in 2007, Koh claimed that "in an appropriate case, he didn't see any reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States."

Want to bet he's just hell on separation of Church and State when it applies to Christian or Jewish belief?

A spokeswoman for Koh said she couldn't confirm the incident, responding: "I had heard that some guy . . . had asked a question about sharia law, and that Dean Koh had said something about that while there are obvious differences among the many different legal systems, they also share some common legal concepts."
Oh, of COURSE she couldn't confirm it; so she plays legal wording to get around it.

From the sound of it, he'd like to have Bill Ayers(terrorist dickhead/Friend of Obama) consulting, too; they'll probably get along well together. And you know he'd just love to have that treaty screwing the 2nd Amendment into a disposal passed; why, it'd bring us into line with all the other countries with disarmed peasants! And that oath he'd have to take, that part about 'supporting and defending the Constitution'? No problem, he'll just ignore it. What's your word worth when you have International Agreements to put together...

It has been declared: it is

*************************National*****************************

**************************Offend****************************************
*****************************A********************************
**************************Feminist***************************
****************************Week!****************************

And, just because I like belly dancers,

and hot chicks with guns
(or without, for that matter)

Now, if I had a shot of a belly dancer, on a beach, with a gun...

I can understand why people turn 'All Politics!' in blogging; (updated)

there's just so damn much out there.

Standard lefty activity nowadays: realize what an idiot you've made of yourself, so make copyright claim to try to hide the words.
It is clear that Hilton is embarrassed by what he said, and he is using a transparently frivolous copyright claim to try to squelch free speech about his ridiculous statements.

I’m not standing for it.

If Hilton sends me a DMCA takedown notice, I’m going to fight it — and I may sue him. I have never seen a clearer example of fair use in my life.
I have to add in this from Hendrix at Cold Fury:
An “intellectual titan?” Well, next to a wholly rancid putz like Olbermann, sure. To anyone who can scrape up more than two functioning brain cells in a pinch, he looks like a mincing progressivist simpleton who will brook no disagreement whatsoever with the prevailing Left orthodoxy, and will not allow dissenting views to be expressed without a lot of shrill caterwauling and gratuitous cruelty in response– even when he asks for those views himself. He ought to be bitchslapped until he quacks like a duck — or at least until he learns some proper decorum when addressing people whose opinions he lacks the grey matter to comprehend, and the broad-minded forbearance to tolerate.

Not a peep, strangely, from any of these smarmy fatheads about their idol Obama’s stated position on the issue, which mirrors Prejean’s own. But that’s because they assume he’s lying about it, in order to further gull the rubes. And I’m sure they’re correct in that assumption. Which, for blindly worshipful twits like these, makes Obama — what? Courageous? Clever? Guileful? A real stand-up guy? What?


I once told a guy who belonged to a teachers union my thought: that a good teacher is a jewel to be cherished and paid as much as we can afford, and bad teachers need to be thrown the hell out before they do more damage. He stated, with indignant look, "I've never seen a bad teacher!" He was full of crap, and this lists some of the damage they can do:
Meanwhile, said Kendra Wallace, principal of Daniel Webster Middle School on Los Angeles' Westside, an ineffective teacher can instruct 125 to 260 students a year -- up to 1,300 in the five years she says it often takes to remove a tenured employee.
There should be protections so that, for instance, a teacher can't be screwed over for holding kids to account for their actions(idiot parent: "You can't flunk him just because you don't like what he did!" "Ma'am, he doesn't do his assignments and what he does turn in is wrong; he flunked." "You're a racist/bigot/(fill in the insult blank)!") But protecting teachers who shouldn't be there from being canned isn't doing the kids any favors, and hurts a lot of them.

Do you believe Obama's people would make threats like this? And act like this? Unfortunately, I do.
"The charge is completely untrue," said White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton, "and there's obviously no evidence to suggest that this happened in any way."
Umm, when someone makes statements like that, it doesn't exactly give confidence in their honesty, does it?

And last, but definitely not least, Speaker Pelosi(Socialist Crapweasel-CA) is trying to make it harder for law enforcement to go after corrupt politicians:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is working to buffer lawmakers from federal investigators. This is a bad idea. Special legal protections for politicians encourage unethical conduct.

Irvin B. Nathan, general counsel of the House of Representatives, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday about establishing a protocol on how to handle “hopefully rare searches and electronic surveillance involving members of Congress.” Mr. Nathan previously failed to negotiate such an agreement with the George W. Bush administration when Republicans controlled the House. His return to this effort isn’t surprising given the number of congressional Democrats facing accusations of ethical misconduct.
Don't you just love that wording? “...hopefully rare searches and electronic surveillance". Translation: "We can make it harder for the cops to go after members of Congress, which will make it easier for them to take care of their johns- er, I mean constituents without being troubled by these nasty law enforcement people. I mean, who do they think they are, troubling Congressmen just for getting their beak a little wet?"
Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, on Thursday invoked the separation of powers as justification for the move. Mrs. Pelosi, who has acknowledged being aware previously of Mrs. Harman's controversial dialogue, claims the stance is a matter of principle. "Whether it's invading an office or wiretapping a conversation, it's important for us to have the separation of powers and the respect for individual liberties, again, while not harboring information that would be useful under the speech [or] debate clause," she said.
Translation: "Congress should be protected from investigation. The cops and FBI can go after YOU, no problem; you're just a peasant. But showing up with a warrant, or getting a wiretap on a politician? Why, we can't allow that!" And don't you just love her referring to a search with a warrant as 'invading an office'? Think she'd call it that if the FBI showed up at the home or office of a tea party organizer?

I didn't think so.

Two things from (fG)Britain

First, an actress who gives a crap about troops:
Lumley has that rare thing in public life: a simple and uncluttered sense of principle which tells her that if a man is willing to die for a country, then surely he has the right to live there. No ifs, no buts, no 'five conditions that need to be met'.

Indeed, it is this very principle which still seems to elude Mr Brown, whose understanding of words like 'loyalty' might be judged from what he said recently about the Damian McBride email scandal.

'I take full responsibility for what happened. That's why the person who was responsible went immediately.' Yes, he really did say that.

Second, the Brits are losing their tank-building company:
They have fought alongside British soldiers for generations, playing heroic roles on historic battlefields such as the Somme, Cambrai and El Alamein. They have carried famous names such as Centurion, Churchill, Cromwell and Crusader.

But now, nearly a century after inventing the first armoured warhorse - to storm through German lines in the First World War - Britain is to stop building its own tanks.

In the week British troops formally ended their military operations in Iraq, BAe Systems, which makes the Army's Challenger 2 tanks, revealed it was closing its tank-making operation at Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

It is also shutting its armour business at Telford in Shropshire and at other locations because it sees no prospect of new Government orders.
Why?
Defence Secretary John Hutton has declared 'a rebalancing of investment in technology, equipment and people to meet the challenge of irregular warfare'.

He said he planned to strengthen and enlarge Special Forces but gave no hint of even a medium-weight tank in the Army's future.
One of the things I've read a number of times is how important armor, including tanks, can be in counter-insurgency work. One of the lessons somebody noted some time back was that in city combat tanks turned out to be very helpful; yes, they've got weaknesses, and they've got strengths that made a big difference. If the Brits lose the only domestic operation they've got that can build the things... not a good idea, guys.

I want to quote two things from a Times article

on the situation in Iraq. Best to read it all, but these two just stand out.

First:
Colonel Andrew Bacevich, a military historian who lost his son in Iraq, said the rise in casualties threatened Obama’s withdrawal plans. The US military, including General Jim Jones, Obama’s national security adviser, wanted troops to leave the country “in a condition in which they can plausibly claim to have achieved success”, he said.
Isn't that nice. Isn't that just freakin' WONDERFUL?!? "...plausibly claim to have achieved success". They kicked the shit out of the bad guys, have built schools and hospitals and trained and a whole damn pile of other things, and it's reduced to Obama & Co. wanting to yank them out when they can 'plausibly claim success'. Translation: "I want to pull them all out as fast as I can to make my supporters happy, but I don't want to be blamed for what happens after; so do something so I can plausibly claim success so it'll take the heat off." Miserable two-faced bastards.

Second:
The Iraqi security forces were not yet ready to assume control, he said, even if the US was worried about the cost of the war. “I think American forces will have to stay here much longer. It will be shameful if the Americans leave us sinking in blood, simply to escape their economic crisis.”
Hey, the Obama administration, with Barney Frank and other pushing hard, want to chop the defense budget to pieces to pay off supporters and buy future votes; what's a bunch of dead Iraqis to them if they can keep their fat asses in office? The Evil Party betrayed the South Vietnamese and left them to drown in blood; what makes you special to them?

Yes, Obama wants to destroy the 2nd Amendment;

he just doesn't have to balls to try to do it openly.

On April 16, 2009, President Obama emerged from a meeting with Mexico’s President Calderón to announce his support for the “Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Firearms” treaty (CIFTA) ...he promised to push the treaty through the Senate quickly as a means of curtailing the border violence and arms trafficking in Mexico’s current drug wars

I recommend this excellent analysis. It’ll scare the 125gr. outta ya.

-NONE of the proposed gun controls are likely to pass by themselves through Congress. If the treaty is enacted they don’t have to — they become law when the treaty is ratified.

Which is just the kind of backstabbing crap we expected from Obama & Co. If you haven't already, time to call/write the congresscritters, especially in the Senate.

Look this over: "Not reliable enough to consider" or

"We didn't do it, so it doesn't count"?
A Washington state biosurveillance firm raised the first warning about a possible outbreak of swine flu in Mexico more than two weeks before the World Health Organization offered its initial alert about a public health emergency of international concern.

Both federal and international health officials had access to the warning from Veratect. Later e-mails calling attention to the company's subsequent report that the disease was possibly spreading in Mexico were sent to 10 officials of the Centers for Disease Control, said Robert Hart, the company's chief executive.
...
CDC officials in Atlanta said they were aware of Veratect's claims and had not been working with the company.

"We have nothing to add about their claims," said CDC spokesman Llelwyn Grant, adding the CDC and other public health agencies had plans in place to deal with a flu pandemic and responded rapidly once they became aware of the Mexican outbreak.
Which is the critical point: 'once they became aware'. Some good reason to pass up checking this out? Expense, maybe?
Earlier this year, Hart said Veratect gave free access to its Web site to the CDC and WHO on a trial basis.
So they got it free, not cost then.

First thought would be standard CDC arrogance: "It isn't information WE found, so it should be ignored." Back when I first became interested in viruses, among the books I read were a couple by CDC scientists; I can't remember the titles offhand, but let's just say they didn't exactly come across as concerned with the thoughts or opinions of anyone who didn't have advanced degrees. That they approved of. From the right schools. I understand those folks are busy, but to be given a "Something odd is happening" heads-up and apparently ignore it... Not good.

Here's another interesting part:
Others, however, cautioned the use of data mining to track a possible disease outbreak was untested and a number of questions about its effectiveness remained unanswered.

"This approach is not yet vetted," said Dr. Marguerite Neill, an infectious disease specialist at Brown University and a spokesman for the Infectious Disease Society of America. "It is an interesting idea, but we haven't used it before."

Neill said the problem with using information picked up through data mining was determining whether it was just an indication of a routine disease outbreak or something much more serious.

"It needs to be put in a clinical or epidemiological context," she said. "I'm not sure Veratect can do that."
Uh, doc? They're in the business of providing information; it would be your job to decide if it's a problem or not. And it would be your job to put it in a clinical or epidemiological context; they're just providing the information they dig up. Maybe I'm being overly critical on this, but that comment 'we haven't used it before' would seem to indicate more of the 'WE didn't think of it/do it, so it's not really something to consider' attitude. Which really sucks.

Unrelated to the above thoughts is this:
Veratect's warnings came as President Obama prepared for his a trip to Mexico, arriving in Mexico City on April 16. The White House said Thursday an Energy Department staffer who was part of the advance team for Obama's visit is suspected of having contracted swine flu in Mexico and transmitting it to his family in Maryland. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the man, who was not identified, never got within six feet of the president.
Unless he sneezed, of course...

And if you didn't already know what a dipshit Jimmy Carter is,

this should get the point across:
But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives.

Carter, you are a miserable bastard. You sucked up to Arafat and seemed unable to find a dictator you didn't like, you're part of the reason we have the problem we do with islamist terrorists, you crapped on Israel, and you're crapping on gun owners. Tell me, Jimmy, do you include the M1 Carbine as one of those surrounded-by-an-evil-aura 'assault weapons'? How about a M1 Garand? Or a 1903 Springfield? All battle rifles in their day, the nannies want to ban them; are you for that? Or have you some particular firearms in mind that are only good if you 'desire to kill cops and kids in school'?

You were one of the worst Presidents this country had to suffer through, and I see that you haven't improved with time. Just go away, Carter, and stop causing problems and spreading lies.

Ok, this officially sucks

I USED to have a corkscrew

At Med-Fair friends gave me a bottle of the mead the wife had begun brewing, and said bottle's been sitting waiting for a good evening. Which this is. Which leads to

WHERE'D THE DAMN CORKSCREW GO?

I'm trying to refrain from the Zed method, but I'm getting pissed at this point.

Update: Success! No, I didn't find the damn thing; it's amazing what you can do with a knife, isn't it?

And the stuff is good.

Range day

Smith & Wesson Victory ModelThese were made as part of the Lend/Lease program in WWII, when the Brits needed arms(as I recall, this was about the time when they made a plea to the US for people to donate any working firearms, with the promise that they would be returned after the war*). Built on the K frame, double-action revolver, 5-screw, marked * 38 SMITH & WESSON CTG * on the right side of the barrel and ‘United States Property’ on the topstrap. It also has British proof marks on the barrel, on the frame and over each chamber of the cylinder. And, the ‘MADE IN USA’ on the right side of the frame apparently not being good enough, a little tiny stamp that says ‘Not English Make’ on the barrel and receiver**.

According to the book, S&W made a British service revolver prior to these "(K-200, S&W Pistol #2) - "Pre-Model 11" to be precise, then began making them with a 'V' prefix in the serial number, leading to 'Victory Model'. It also says the normal barrel was 4", so this being 5" is unusual. The 'United States Property' stamp makes it early Lend-Lease. Continuing the oddity, it says the original hammer block was a shoulder on the rebound slide that fitted against a shoulder on the hammer; after a fatal accident in which they found that could fail if dropped, some were modified by milling a slot in the sideplate for a sliding hammer block and a modification on the rebound slide to fit it(same hammer block design they still use). This one has a piece fitted to a slot in the sideplate, but it doesn't slide; the upper end can flex out, but the lower is fixed. Unless I'm not understanding something, this doesn't match the description, so I've got some digging to do.

If you’re not familiar with it, the .38S&W preceded the .38 Special; shorter case of slightly larger diameter, slightly larger diameter bullet. The version the Brits used to replace the .455 Webley was originally called the .380/200: .38 caliber, 200-grain round-nose cast bullet at about 650feet per second. I’ve read that it had a pretty good record as a fight-stopper. Later, when it was decided the cast bullet didn’t meet the Geneva Convention specs, they went to a 172-grain jacketed bullet, which had a much lesser reputation. It’s worth noting that there was a .38S&W 200-grain load here in the US called the ‘Super Police’.

According to the book, there were several different finishes used, from polished and blued to a few parkerized. Issue grips are noted as being smooth walnut; this one has what appear to be commercial grips, so probably changed out at some point after it made its way back to the US.

One thing I’ll point out on the loads: pistols set up for the 200-grain load will shoot low with lighter bullets; the 145-grain, for instance, having a higher velocity, leaves the muzzle faster. Conversely, pistols made for the lighter bullet will throw the 200-grain quite a bit high; it being in the barrel longer, recoil has more time to raise it before the bullet exits.

I did some digging around a couple of years ago and found some load information that was supposed to duplicate the .380/200. Lyman makes a mold that throws a 200-grain round-nose bullet, so

DISCLAIMER!!
I tried this load out, and it worked for me; doesn't mean it will for you. Try it at your own peril; if you blow something up, it ain't my doing.

I wound up using the recommended 2.4 grains of Unique. The bullet, as-cast and lubed with Lee Liquid Alox, is seated to an overall length of 1.93" with just a slight crimp, which puts the bullet base right at the top of the powder column. My Chrony shows this going right about 650 feet per second ten feet from the muzzle, which does indeed duplicate original ballistics so far as I can tell. I've tried it in a Enfield MkII, a Webley MkIV and now this; all were originally designed for the .380/200, and all shot this load right to point of aim.

Speaking of which, this beast shot like you'd expect a Smith & Wesson to. I tried it at ten yards single-action, and it placed the Lyman bullets in nice tight groups(tight as I could hold, anyway) right where aimed. Up closer, some fast two-shot drills went right where they should. The action's a bit tight; I'd say it was carried a lot but not fired much. The single-action pull was light and clean, just like it should be.

I also tried some 148-grain wadcutters, as-cast with Liquid Alox over Unique, and they produced very nice groups, about 3" below point of aim.

So I've got a physical piece of an interesting period of history to care for and use. And wonder how it came back to this country. Since a pair of the smooth grips would probably cost a disgusting amount(if I could find any), I think I'll get a piece of walnut from the garage and do some work when the weather allows and make a set. Not only will they be closer to original, I can shape them to fit my hand a bit better.


*As one more example of the trustworthiness of socialist governments, after the war the Attlee government had all the privately donated arms rounded up, put on a couple of old freighters, taken out to sea and the ships sunk. Too bad they couldn’t have put him and his ministers on the boats before they went down.

**I’ve seen a couple of Webley MkIV revolvers produced during the war with ‘WAR FINISH’ stamped on the frame; even with the rush, they wanted it known that this less-than-wonderful finish was NOT representative of their normal work.

A Marine's words to her family

We are not your sons and daughters, whom you must protect and defend. We are your sword and your shield. We are men and women who volunteer to place our lives on the line so you do not have to. We do not decide when or where we will be sent. We go. You are our advocates, not our parents.

We trust you to care for our families, to hold our jobs, pay for our equipment, salary and medical care and yes, to honor our sacrifice. We trust you to vote for good political leadership, to speak out against bad policy decisions and to demand public accountability. However, we do not count on you to explain the honorable character of our service. We are ennobled by the very fact we serve.

Like Kevin says, read every damn word.

I do wonder how Olbermann and Steward would like it

if investigators started digging into everything in their lives? Debts, property, arrests, contacts, the whole works? As the man says, if they can screw with a plumber for daring to ask a real question(which said 'journalists' didn't have the balls to do), why can't their lives be dug into? And reported on?

Whining Evil Party politicians and the President admitting

'might be harder to get information' when we have to ask the terrorists nicely for what they're up to.
Hispanic Democrats are furious and demanding an apology over an image wedged in a new GOP web video on terrorism that shows members of the Hispanic Caucus sitting at a table with President Obama.

“On behalf of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), we write to demand an apology for the inclusion of the picture of the CHC meeting with President Obama in the video on your official website entitled “Do You Feel Safer?,’” the CHC wrote in a letter being sent to Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), whose office created the video.
"You showed us with President Obama in your nasty video! How dare you!" Shut up, butthead.

In a strikingly defensive explanation of his stance on Bush-era anti-terrorism tactics, President Obama on Wednesday acknowledged for the first time that the harsh interrogation techniques he has banned might have yielded useful information, but that he was nonetheless willing to rule them out on moral grounds.

...He conceded that "it may be harder" to get information, but what "makes us, I think, still a beacon to the world is that we are willing to hold true to our ideals, even when it's hard, not just when it's easy."
Translation: "Even whenif the terrorists kill a bunch more Americans, I think it's worth it to remember that we behaved well while questioning those who knew what was going to happen."

God help us.

Doesn't this sound an awful lot like "You don't want to waste a

crisis"?
There are a million more where these came from. The underlying theory was pioneered by Joseph Goebbels:

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

Goebbels continues:

The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

A couple of thoughts about the "The Gummint Did It!"

conspiracy morons. Brought on by the idiocy noticed by Rachel.

First, have you noticed that it's almost always the US? One commenter does accuse the Mexican government(which would make it unquestionably the Mexican flu, but I digress) releasing it to save itself and consolidate power, but for every one else, it's primarily us to suspect:
Then again, governments of the world have routinely engaged in crimes against humanity, haven’t they? The U.S., for example, dropped nuclear bombs on civilian populations in Japan. Israel rained white phosphorous on Palestinians, Hitler exterminated countless Jews, and Americans fired millions of rounds of depleted uranium rounds into targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unleashing a viral biological weapon in Mexico City is no great leap beyond what governments have already done to achieve their goals.
although you'll notice this clown made a very nice moral comparison between us, Israel and the fucking Nazis. We used a pair of nukes to end a war, saving God knows how many lives that would've been lost in an invasion: War Crime. We used DU shells(DU having, as I recall about the same radioactivity level as granite) to take out enemy armor: War Crime. Israel used standard smoke round which use WP to make smoke: War Crime. We're just as bad as the Nazis who murdered millions. Fuck you, Mike Adams, you miserable little boob.

And this comment she found:
The US regime invests heavily in bioweapons warfare - why should we not suspect them ?

Whatever happened with the strange Anthrax released in the US - it was found to be weapons grade Athrax from an American military bioweapons lab ; why should this be any different - a cultured swine/bird/human virus weaponized by the American regime and deliberately released.

I only give 30% probability to this being deliberately released by the American regime ; however by all means they should be considered to be one of the main suspects behind this swine/bird/human weaponized virus. (this weaponized swine/bird/human virus shows up one week after Obama and Air Force one and his 3000 strong Secret Service entourage visited Mexico City…)
All the proper progressive bullshit: the US 'regime', the accusations of bioweapons research(y'know, like vaccines and such? When it was the Soviets weaponizing smallpox and plague?)

Which leads to the second: Aside from the general idiocy, does this clown and all his little buttmonkeys not think that, did we wish to wipe out a large portion of the planet population, we couldn't have put something together with a bit more oomph than this? I'll be he doesn't worry at all about the damned islamic terrorists trying to get nukes and bio-agents, but that damned America, it needs to be stopped!

I was going to hit the outdoor range today, but:

It rained again last night, so that on top of all the rest the last few days will make the place a marsh.
Chance of more rain the next few days. 30% today, but I've seen that turn into "Toad-floater storms are moving into the area" with no warning, so. Especially with 70% chance tonight.
I need groceries.
So that means maybe the indoor range to try a couple of things out, then shopping.

At least this is not looking for clothes or shoes, both of which I loathe. Grocery shopping means finding what you need and putting it in the cart; clothes and shoes involves trying stuff on and looking(especially at shoes) and thinking "They what HOW MUCH? For THIS?!?" And I need some new black dress shoes, and yes I have been putting it off. And will continue to do so for a while longer. In the meantime,

Federal Felony To Use Blogs, the Web, Etc. To Cause Substantial Emotional Distress Through "Severe, Repeated, and Hostile" Speech? More wonderfulness from the morons in Congress.

Apparently the 9th Circuit's ruling on the 2nd Amendment wasn't really news. In the minds of our professional journalists, anyway.

Why is it that every time someone is for 'social justice' and connnected bullcrap, they're either a socialist or commie? Or, considering the proper definition, a fascist? And don't like Israel? And all too often are a professor or other 'professional educator'?

So the popular new statement is that Harry Truman was a War Criminal! I'm sure, soon as they figure a way to whack at the US, they'll get around- finally- to declaring Franklin Roosevelt, too. Which will just display fully what a bunch of freakin' loons they are. Like a lot of politicians, there are some solid reasons to be pissed at Truman, so garbage like this is just insane. If he hadn't decided to use the bomb, the casualties our troops would have taken(let's ignore the Japanese dead and wounded for now) in the invasion would have been horrendous; as one of his advisors said, 'When it comes out you had a way to end the war without this, and didn't use it, the people will call for your impeachment; and they'll be right to.' His hanging in the street, for that matter; you try explaining to a couple of million families that their father/husband/uncle/son is dead or crippled because the President thought using this bomb on the enemy 'just too nasty'. Especially since the enemy had been murdering prisoners of war, committing atrocities left and right and- we know for fact- was planning to murder EVERY POW the moment the invasion started.

But that doesn't matter to morons like Stewart, and I'm sure there are others who agree with him; much better to have a lot of American dead than some of the enemy. Especially if saving our guys would mean something so horrible as putting a bug in a box with the bad guy.


The kind of people Obama will push for the Supreme Court.
-Dean Kagan has taken positions that are disturbingly out of the mainstream. For example, driven by her view that the “don’t ask; don’t tell” policy adopted by a Democrat Congress and President Clinton is “a profound wrong–a moral injustice of the first order,” she argued that it violates the First Amendment for the United States to withhold funds from colleges that ban the military from recruiting on campus. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected this view.

-It is also unclear that a Justice Kagan would be an adequately independent check on executive excesses. She has argued in favor of greatly enhanced presidential control over the bureaucracy, which is concerning in light of President Obama’s unprecedented centralization of power in the White House.
...
-Judge Sotomayor’s personal views may cloud her jurisprudence. As Judge Sotomayor explained in a 2002 speech at Berkeley, she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their “experiences as women and people of color” in their decisionmaking, which she believes should “affect our decisions.”

-Only just recently, in Ricci v. DeStefano, Judge Sotomayor was chastised by fellow Clinton-appointee Jose Cabranes for going to extraordinary lengths to dispense with claims of unfair treatment raised by firefighters. Judge Sotomayor’s panel heard a case raising important questions under Title VII and equal protection law, but attempted to dispose of the firefighter’s arguments in a summary order, until called out by Judge Cabranes. The Supreme Court has agreed to review the case.
...
Judge Wood’s judicial views have on occasion been far outside mainstream legal thought and appear driven by her personal policy views. In NOW v. Scheidler, she wrote an opinion applying RICO – a statute designed for mob prosecutions – to prevent pro-life activists from engaging in protests. The Supreme Court reversed with Justices Ginsburg’s and Breyer’s concurrence. NOW v. Scheidler, 537 U.S. 393, 402 (2003).

-Judge Wood has betrayed a consistent hostility to religious litigants and religious interests. For example, Christian Legal Soc’y v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853, 867 (7th Cir. 2006), she would have voted to allow a public university to revoke the student organization charter of the Christian Legal Society because it declined to extend membership to homosexuals.

And let's not forget Roxana Saberi, one of the results of the 'smart diplomacy' we've got going on.

And now, to the stores.

Does the State Department think Texas IS a foreign country?

Along with this little note:
Secretary Clinton is already the most traveled Secretary of State in a new Administration. The Secretary’s trips have included her inaugural trip to Asia, the Middle East and Europe, Mexico and across the border to Texas, the Hague in the Netherlands, Europe with President Obama, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago with President Obama, and to Iraq and Kuwait.
Are the people who put this together this friggin' stupid, or are they telling Texas that they already consider it foreign?