Dead Dog Chili

We made us some "Dead Dog Chili" today. It's almost indescribable when done right--so much flavor from the peppers and spices....your eyes water and your nose runs, but it's so good that you just can't stop eating it. Long-time readers will know that Lagniappe and I love to create and devour some serious chili. And Dead Dog Chili is serious manly stuff--definitely not suitable for women, wimps or liberals.

So where does the name come from? Well you just have to look at Lagniappe after he has some of it.
Happy dog...dead to the world. Or maybe just dead. I might have gone just a bit too heavy on the habernero peppers this batch...

OK, I'm getting pissed...

Frankly, I've had more than enough of the whines, complaints, threats and assaults that have come from those illegally in our country and the piss-poor excuses for Americans who side with them. We've seen Mexicans rioting in Phoenix, Arizona, attacking American police officers and vandalizing American public buildings just because the State of Arizona passed a new law to criminalize being in our country illegally and requiring the police to take action when they encounter someone that they suspect is not supposed to be here. So why are the Mexicans even in Phoenix? Last I checked, Phoenix was ours, not theirs. And if they don't like the fact that our legislators voted to enforce our laws, they are free to go home any time.

Screw them...and Damn them for making me agree with Pat Buchanan on something. He writes an excellent column on this law and the fact that we have every right to protect our own borders. He points out that even as jobs become scarcer and scarcer here, many are being filled not by Americans who want them but by illegal aliens. Ironically, career race-monger Al Sharpton is pledging to go to Arizona to lead a march on behalf of those illegals and their supposed "right" to be in our country despite our laws. One has to wonder how many unemployed black Americans could be working today but for all of the illegals who have cut in front of them in our own job marketplace. Way to look our for your base, Al...

And in Chicago, more idiots and illegal-lovers were arrested for blocking a deportation van carrying 70 other illegal aliens to the airport for removal.

And even up in Maryland, we've got more protests on behalf of an illegal alien who was ordered deported in 2004, chose not to leave, and is now facing forced repatriation to her own country after being arrested for another criminal act.

Florinda Fabiola Lorenzo-DeSimilian was arrested at her home last Tuesday for allegedly selling $2 phone cards without a license, a misdemeanor. Her fingerprints were taken when she was booked into the Prince George's County Correctional Center. Those prints were sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI forwarded them to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). There was a hit. Sources say ICE had placed a hold order on Lorenzo-DeSimilian in 2004 for overstaying her visa. She was released from jail last Friday pending a deportation hearing.

Last night, CASA of Maryland--a taxpayer-funded advocacy group for illegal freaking aliens--staged a protest outside the Prince George's County jail. About 60 members of the county's Latino community showed up to holler about the alleged "injustice" of us daring to enforce our own laws and blaming correctional officials for sending her fingerprints to the FBI.

I have to wonder why there wasn't an ICE bus over there to round them all up and check each one of their fingerprints. And why was she released when she has a history of not complying with court orders or showing up for removal?

Oh yeah...Obama is President. He wants these illegals all legalized so that there will be a new, large and permanent underclass to vote for Democrats. And he's not alone--there are plenty of sell-outs on Congress, including Rep. Luis Gutierrez, (D)-Chicago, who spends tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to fly all across America, ceaselessly advocating on behalf of illegal aliens from Mexico and fighting for virtually all things hispanic. (Imagine if there was a white Congressman or Senator who was an avowed champion of the white race...oh that's right--there is one. Robert Byrd, the former Klan leader, is the senior Democrat Senator from West Virginia, isn't he?)

But if you or I stand up for America and demand that our borders be closed to illegal crossings and those illegally here get sent home without regard for their country of origin, we get called "racist." Right.

Enough. Our country. OUR Country. Ours. It's time to stop this nonsense. I don't have a problem with our admitting immigrants from any country or region, especially those with needed skills, provided that they come through legal means, pass background checks, health screens and demonstrate an ability to speak our language and respect our culture. But this is our country, and we have a right to say who can or cannot come in, and how many people per year we'll allow in so as not to overtax our ability to assimilate them all. Mexico claims that right as they enforce strict immigration laws against those crossing into their nation from the south, yet they threaten us with boycotts for doing not even a fraction of what they do.

Mexico threatening us with boycotts? Telling Mexicans not to travel to Arizona? Excuse me, but that's like the late Michael Jackson threatening to not show up at your eight year old son's sleepover. What do we have to do to get them to boycott out other 49 states?

Frankly, I'm sick of this crap. It's a fight with America and every decent American on one side, and Mexico, 12 million illegal aliens, and a host of advocacy groups hostile to our country and our way of life on the other (including, as of this moment, the government of the City of San Francisco). There are even scattered calls for outright revolution by the illegals and their supporters against the rest of us.

Revolution? Armed insurgency by outsiders and disloyal Americans? Against my country?
If Lagniappe and I have to go down there in defense of our country and our heritage, we will do it, and you can be sure that we'll be bringing a boatload of whoop-ass with us.

I have to hope that America is waking up and strengthening in it's resolve to defend itself. These foreigners cannot be allowed to force their way into our country and claim citizenship en masse just because they want it. We need to put a stop to this crap before it gets out of hand, and the only way to do that is through more enforcement, more border security, more deportations, and sanctions against those who hire, hide, transport or otherwise give aid to those illegally in our country.

Hell, if the Mexicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans and others who work so hard to get in here and steal identities so that they can take jobs, put their kids in our schools and fraudulently obtain benefits from our government had put half as much effort into trying to make their own countries into decent places to live, they wouldn't have any reason to want to come here.

Alcho-dog has taken to drinking again.

I guess his last experiment with Southern Comfort didn't teach him.

Last night, I poured myself a large Bushmills, which I intended to sip as I read my latest Sean Dillon adventure. (They actually kind of suck because Higgins recycles so many plot devices, but I'm hooked...help!)

As I sat in my gun room reading, I set my glass down on top of a case of ammunition that I was using as an end table and thought nothing of it as Lagniappe walked over to me. I reached over and gave him a pat on the head and a scratch behind the ears and continued reading, expecting him to either lie down or leave again and retire to his dog bed.

Lagniappe apparently had other, more nefarious intentions. He stuck his muzzle into my glass and took a couple of laps of my whiskey.

"DAMMIT!" I yelled as he backed up, pivoted, and ran for the stairs. Not only are dogs not supposed to drink, but Bushmills is a bit too pricey for that. And even though he only had a tiny bit, I had to dump it and pour a fresh drink because the rest of the glass wasn't quite as appealing with dog spit in it.

Stupid dog...that's coming out of your allowance.

At least he's got good taste.



Bushmills Irish Whiskey--the drink of choice for discriminating ex-police dogs.

Flashback to New Orleans stupidity.

The year was 1998. Marc Morial, Mayor of the City of New Orleans, spearheaded an effort to bankrupt the gun manufacturers and dealers in this country by filing a lawsuit claiming that they were responsible for causing countless deaths and injuries due to the number of guns that the manufacturers and dealers sold every year. They ignored the fact that each of these guns were sold legally, in full accordance with federal, state and local laws. The lawsuit named every domestic manufacturer of firearms in America: Smith & Wesson, Sturm Ruger, Beretta U.S.A., Colt, Glock, and several smaller companies. It's purpose was clear: to bankrupt these companies and put them out of business. And in this effort, they had the full support of then-President William Clinton.

There was just one problem, though--one that the defendants and their National Rifle Association attorneys were quick to bring to light: For decades, the City of New Orleans had itself sold thousands of confiscated and surplus firearms to some of the same wholesalers that the targeted dealers used for distribution. In short, if any of these companies was guilty of anything, New Orleans was equally guilty.

This effort quickly tanked, and led to the passage of new laws nationwide designed to bar states and local units of government from bringing any more such asinine lawsuits. (Thanks, NRA!)

One gun in particular that the City of New Orleans took a lot of heat for selling: The Beretta 92F 9mm Semi-automatic pistol. New Orleans sold 700 of these pistols that were retired from the New Orleans Police Department as part of their effort to re-equip their police officers with new Glock handguns. Beretta and Glock--two of the companies that New Orleans did business with then turned around and sued. Talk about hypocrisy.

Well I recently came upon one of those Beretta 92's, complete with it's NOPD marking intact. I'd been looking for one of these pretty much since the days of that lawsuit, but they've been harder to find than Sen. Mary Landrieu's integrity.Here it is--Exhibit A in the response to Morial's stupid lawsuit--a New Orleans Police Department-marked pistol that the City of New Orleans made available to anyone with a little cash who could pass a federal background check.

I sold off all of my Beretta handguns a few years ago when times got tight, and to be honest, I've not missed them. I always found them to be a bit large and cumbersome for a 9mm and not quite as accurate as other guns in it's class. However, as a former resident of the Crescent City and as an observer of that lawsuit and the NRA's crushing defeat of the plaintiffs, I'd always wanted one of these. And I've searched for years without success, until today. As of today, I've finally got one.



I'm also proud to report that I took it right from the FFL dealer to the range, and it shot just the way that a Beretta shoots--totally reliably and as accurately as their muddy triggers allow. I'm happy.

I don't normally name my guns, but if I did, I would name this veteran of New Orleans "Katrina".

Washington DC gun rally organizers shoot the movement in the foot

Yesterday, April 19th, the pro-gun folks came from around the country to gather in Washington DC and some--with the guns--rallied across the river in Virginia.

Personally I thought that this was great. Power to the people, especially the polite, normal, sane and law-abiding armed people...you know--the ones who don't commit crimes or pose a threat to society. This demographic is also known as: "the vast majority of gun owners".

In short, these are the good people, and this was a great opportunity to get our message out and show the mewling hoplophobes that we're not the demons that Sarah Brady and many Democrats say that we are.

But then the organizers of the rallies had to go any put up two speakers that basically laid claim to being everything that the gun-banners say we are: paranoid and potentially dangerous people just waiting to go shoot someone.

First, they put up Mike Vanderboegh, a militia leader from Alabama best known for telling his followers to go out and throw rocks through the windows of legislators who voted for Obamacare.

Now I oppose Obamacare with every fiber of my being, but thug action isn't how America is supposed to work. Vanderboegh was rightfully condemned by many true conservatives and patriots for this un-American act, but still, the organizers of this rally thought that he'd be a good spokesman for our cause for some reason. And like the lout that he apparently is, he got up on the stage and basically promised to shoot any law enforcement officer who who tries to bring him into a court for not buying an insurance policy as mandated by Obamacare.

"If I know I'm not going to get a fair trial in federal court ... I at least have the right to an unfair gunfight," Vanderboegh said.

Seriously? Guy, you need to shut the fuck up. You don't speak for me or, I suspect, for most other sane, rational gun owners. It used to be that we'd hear the self-professed "warriors" of the militia boasting about how they'll kill police and soldiers when the big gun round-up starts, but now we've got one claiming that he'll kill over the possibility of a fine for not buying health insurance. What next? Declaring jihad because the neighbor kid walks across your lawn?

Mike Vanderboegh does not speak for me. He's a punk and his presence at that rally was a stain on all of the truly great and good who came out, people like Suzanna Gratia Hupp, a woman who truly was victimized by armed criminals while forced by law to remain defenseless. Who would even consider putting a tool like Vanderboegh up on a dais with a true fighter and hero like her?

And it got worse. At the DC rally, someone decided that the keynote speaker should by Larry Pratt, the charlatan who runs Gun Owners of America and spends most of that group's money fighting against the NRA and any state gun-rights organization that tries to achieve progress for gun owners by legislative means. Let me say that I know Larry Pratt, having dealt with him more than once in my professional life, and he, like Vanderboegh, is just a loudmouth who deliberately stirs up controversy because he's figured out that scared or angry gun owners will give him more money than happy ones will. And for Pratt, it's always been about the money. You see, his group, Gun Owners of America, isn't run by a real board of elected members like the NRA is--it's run by him, his family, and a few cronies, and the money that the group takes in basically goes into their own bank accounts instead of the fight for your freedoms or mine. In short, Larry Pratt is a parasite who leeches onto our cause for his own profit and sucks off resources that should have been used for our real fight. And yesterday, it was vintage Pratt as he exclaimed: "We're in a war. The other side knows they are at war, because they started it," said Larry Pratt, president of the Gun Owners of America. "They are coming for our freedom, for our money, for our kids, for our property. They are coming for everything because they are a bunch of socialists."

In other words, just riling people up. No plan, no credibility--just demagoguery, no doubt followed by the circulation of pre-printed envelopes so that the good but naive people in attendance could send him more of their cash.

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: Larry Pratt does not speak for me. I would not cross the street to piss on him if he was on fire.

Honestly, while it's great to have these gatherings, the goal should be to show non-gun folks that we're as mainstream and regular as they are and not the evil people that we're portrayed at. To do this, we need to put up speakers who are mainstream and normal, not flaming ranters threatening war. By putting the likes of Vanderboegh and Pratt out front at the visible public face of the movement, the organizers of these rallies just confirmed that we're every bit as kooky, dangerous and untrustworthy as they've been saying that we are.

Maybe next time, you'll try to get someone like Tom Selleck, Oliver North, John Lott, Massad Ayoob, or Congressional Representatives Don Young and Barbara Cubin--you know...normal people who know how to speak articulately and present a decent image, not gooberish whack jobs who glory in being able to issue threats in our name. These people are not us and we don't need their baggage as we struggle to reclaim our rights.

Stories on the rallies:

Washington Post
New Orleans Times Picayune

Sometimes art imitates life

In Allen Park, Michigan, Ricardo West, a Michael Jackson impersonator was charged with child molesting.

Oh--and he drove a school bus, too.

When I'm President, child molesters won't go to jail any more.
Once they're convicted, they'll be chained to an old engine block and promptly tossed off the closest pier.

Interesting observation

So yesterday, I hapened to find myself down in Washngton, DC. While there, I wandered past the White House along Pennsylvania Avenue. I used to really enjoy doing that, but it's hard to feel the national pride there that I once did. Maybe it'll come back in 2013...

Anyway, I couldn't help but notice the groups and individuals that were there demonstrating. One large group was made up of Iranians who were protesting something that the Iranian government was doing. Another guy--a regular, according to a Secret Service guy I talked with--was an Egyptian (and a radical muslim cleric with a Secret Service and an FBI history). He's apparently miffed at something that his government is doing. And of course both demonstrations also sought to coerce America "do something" about the issues.

Only in America do people come from all over the world to protest their own governments and demand that ours take action.

I thought about asking some of them why they don't stage these protests in their own countries where their own leaders might see them, but the answer was self-obvious--they'd be killed if they tried it. Only here in America do people have that freedom, that right, no matter who they are or what their cause is.

Let's just hope that we, the People, can reign Obama in before he takes that right away from us.

Squib!!!

So today I'm out on the pistol range with a new shooter I'm instructing. She's got a couple of new pistols that a gun shop that gave her her CCW class sold her despite the fact that they were pretty much inappropriate for her needs and skill level. One of the guns was a Ruger SP101, which was actually ok provided that she shoot it with light .38 Special loads in order to get the feel for it. Of course they just sold her several boxes of .357 magnum ammo to go with it, and the result was predictable--the recoil and noise was such that she wound up scared of it and she'd flinch so badly that she couldn't even hit the target. Nice job, gun shop. You got rid of a gun and made some money but ruined a new shooter.

So I gave her some .38 Special loads that I put together on my loading bench. They were much lighter and she was actually enjoying shooting them and starting to put them nicely on the target when all of a sudden, the gun made a funny sound--instead of going "BANG", it went "Pffftttt..."

Fortunately she was still apprehensive of the gun and my command for her to stop shooting was superfluous. She handed it back over, and when I dumped the rounds and checked the bore, my fear was confirmed: There was a bullet lodged tightly in the barrel just to the rear of the front sight. DAMN!!!

Apparently there was no powder or just a little powder in that case, and the result was that the bullet was only moved forward a few inches, where it wedged itself into the barrel. No real harm there, but the firing of a subsequent full-power round into that plugged barrel would have been very ugly and almost certainly painful.

I've loaded and fired thousands and thousands of rounds of ammunition over the years but that was the first squib load that I've put together--as far as I know--since I started reloading. And of course it doesn't hit me--it hits a new shooter that I'm working with. How embarrassing.

It actually took some doing for me to get my student to stop blaming herself and/or her gun for the problem. She wasn't confident at all on the range, and that definitely didn't help. But I assured her that it was my screw-up, committed in June of '08 per the data on that ammo box, and that I owned the problem 100%. Luckily, the local gunsmith at the shop where I do a lot of business was able to bang that bullet back out of the barrel with no damage to the gun and no cost to me. Still, it was a lesson learned--pay attention when charging your cases and make sure that there's actually powder in each and every one of them before you even screw the seating die into the press.

But it ended well. My student is now shooting .38 Special loads instead of full-power .357 Magnum rounds and she's starting to gain confidence and competence her pistol. She's also trading a six-and-a-half inch barrel Smith and Wesson 686 that her shop sold her--for concealed carry--in for a new Ruger LCR in .38 Special that she fell in love with at my gun shop.

So all's well that ends well...but it'll probably be a while before I stop shaking my cartridges and listening for the sound of powder moving around inside before loading them into my firearms. Yeeesh!

Is that wrong?

I've noticed recently that every time the police raid some criminal's place or take down some goofy anti-government militia group, the media rushes to publicize how many guns and how much ammunition that the person/group had.

I almost always find myself mentally comparing the dramatically published figures to my own modest stock of guns and ammunition and asking myself "Is that all?" None of them appear to have as much as I do.

Either the gun collections of people the the media are getting all upset over are pretty pathetic, or else I have too many guns and too much ammo--and I don't think that's possible.

Leftists boast of their plans to infiltrate Tea Party movement

Be warned now--at future tax protests and other Tea Party events, you can expect to see people making racist and otherwise patently stupid claims on behalf of the broad coalition of patriotic Americans who comprise the Tea Parties. However it probably won't be real patriotic Americans doing it--it'll be the same Obama-supporting socialists on the left that are already well known for disrupting meetings featuring conservative speakers and vandalizing government and private property all across the country.

ALBANY, N.Y. — Opponents of the fiscally conservative tea party movement say they plan to infiltrate and dismantle the political group by trying to make its members appear to be racist, homophobic and moronic.

Jason Levin, creator of http://www.crashtheteaparty.org, said Monday the group has 65 leaders in major cities across the country who are trying to recruit members to infiltrate tea party events for April 15 — tax filing day, when tea party groups across the country are planning to gather and protest high taxes.

"Every time we have someone on camera saying that Barack Obama isn't an American citizen, we want someone sitting next to him saying, 'That's right, he's an alien from outer space!'" Levin said.

Tea party members said the backlash comes from ignorance.

"They can't actually debate our message and that's their problem," said Bob MacGuffie, a Connecticut organizer for Right Principles, a tea party group that also has members in New York and New Jersey.

The tea party movement generally unites on the fiscally conservative principles of small government, lower taxes and less spending. Beyond that the ideology of the people involved tends to vary dramatically.

Levin says they want to exaggerate the group's least appealing qualities, further distance the tea party from mainstream America and damage the public's opinion of them.

"Do I think every member of the tea party is a homophobe, racist or a moron? No, absolutely not," Levin said. "Do I think most of them are homophobes, racists or morons? Absolutely."

The site manifesto says they want to dismantle the Tea Party by nonviolent means. "We have already sat quietly in their meetings, and observed their rallies," the site said.

Another tea party organizer said the attempt to destroy the movement was evidence its message is resonating.

"We've been ignored, we've been ridiculed. Well, now they're coming after us," said Judy Pepenella, a co-coordinator for the New York State Tea Party. "Gandhi's quote is one we understand: 'First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.'"

They even have their own little web forum. I hesitated before deciding to give them the publicity, but I figured that in this case it bodes every decent American well to be able to watch these fools. Knowledge is, after all, power.

And lest you think this is an isolated occurrence, Michelle Malkin has much, much more.

It's sad actually, to think that this is what the one side of the political debate has to sink to. Our founding fathers cherished free speech and open debate, but the liberals and other assorted clods on the left aren't smart enough or mature enough to offer their viewpoints up in the public arena and make a case for why their ideas are better than others; no they have to resort to pathetic and dishonest crap like this. But that's what separates them from the rest of us--that and the fact that our ideas, when openly disseminated, not only scare the left but they appeal to the average American. The liberals only wish that they could make the same claim.

No wonder that they're so bitter and angry that they feel the need to resort to lies instead of discussion and debate. I suspect that had any of these wanks been around in 1781, our nation's founders would have made sure that every last one of them left on the ships with the departing British and their Tory sympathizers.

Thanks for nothing, Marlin Firearms.

So I've been having problems with my Marlin Model 1894 .357 Magnum lever-action rifle. When working the action, sometimes the carrier allows a second shell to leave the magazine tube partially during operation, binding the action completely with a jam that cannot be corrected in the field. This is apparently known to lever-gun enthusiasts as the dreaded "Marlin jam". This jam and it's fix are described on this helpful page.

Well I called Marlin to get another carrier to replace the one that's obviously worn and damaged from the sharp edge that they at the Marlin factory left on the cam edge of the lever when they built the gun initially. It's clearly a design flaw--their fault.

Not only do they not want to send the replacement parts out at no cost, but they don't want to send them to me at all. It turns out, per the girl who my call was transferred to at Marlin, that gun parts are considered "restricted" and only available to actual federal firearms licensees(FFL)--gun dealers.

I thought that she was mistaken at first. Whole firearms or firearms receivers--the serial-numbered part--are restricted per federal law, but simple non-serial-numbered parts?

Not by law, it turns out, but by Marlin's own policy. The carrier assembly is restricted; customers can't buy one. Hammers are restricted, triggers are restricted...you get the idea. If you own a Marlin rifle, you're not getting repair parts for it, at least not from Marlin. Seriously, what other gun company does asinine stuff like that?

So now I have a rifle that's down and no easy way to get the "fix-it" parts without going through a gun shop. And what makes it worse is that the failure is MARLIN'S FAULT! This is a common defect in their guns according to the lever-gun folks I've been talking to, and Marlin knows it as well as anyone. Yet they won't fix it without charging me substantially nor will they send me the parts so that I can fix it.

This stands in stark contrast to the wonderful customer service that I got from their competitor, Henry Repeating Arms Co., when I had a problem with a used Henry that I'd bought from a pawn shop. Henry took care of that problem like few other businesses would have and I sing their praises and recommend their products to this day.

Marlin...not so much. In fact, Marlin just went up on my "Do not buy from" list, right alongside Colt Firearms.

Shame on you, Marlin. And screw you, too. I will get that part, but I will not get another Marlin product.

Now that's just ignorant...

From The Smoking Gun.

Meet Tasha Lee Cantrell. The 19-year-old Floridian was riding in a car early Monday morning when the vehicle's driver was pulled over and arrested for DUI. As a tow truck arrived to remove her friend's car, a stranded Cantrell asked Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office Deputy Mitchell Landis for a ride home to her Fort Walton Beach residence. Landis agreed, but only after checking Cantrell's purse for any contraband, according to an offense report. While chauffeuring Cantrell, Landis heard the teenager "open a can of some sort" in the back of the cruiser. "As I looked at my in car video I observed Cantrell drinking out of an unknown can." Landis stopped his car and, upon further investigation, determined that Cantrell had popped open a can of Steel Reserve, a malt liquor known for its high alcohol content. "When I opened the rear passenger door I observed Cantrell attempting to hide the can between her legs. I retrieved this can and noticed it was Steel Reserve Beer," reported Landis, who immediately arrested Cantrell for underage drinking. Instead of being shuttled to her doorstep, Cantrell, pictured in the below mug shot, was rerouted to the sheriff's office, where she was booked on the misdemeanor charge.I mean, Damn...talk about stupid. Getting a free ride, almost home...just have to not break the law for a few more minutes...but what the heck--let's drink the beer in the back of the police car. The officer surely won't mind, right?

That's just ignorant. She deserved to get locked up, just for being a melon head. Her parents must be so proud right now.

Judging by the look on her face, she still thinks it's funny. Hopefully it'll still amuse her when prospective employers or college admissions officers Google her name and decide that she's not the applicant that they want to bring on board.

Meanwhile, back at the Lair, Lagniappe was having a bad day

First, Lagniappe took his beloved stuffed hedgehog out onto the deck yesterday, even though he knows that he's not supposed to. Stupid dog...we've been over this so many times. The hedgehog is an indoor toy.

And as expected, he dropped it off the deck like he always does, and he barked and cried until finally I came out and figured out what was causing him so much trauma. Of course I didn't see his hedgehog down below the deck, so finally I went outside to see what his issue was, and he ran down and bolted out the door past me. I yelled at him because he's not allowed out loose in the front yard, but he just ran out, grabbed his toy, and ran back in the house again. That's when I realized what his malfunction was--he just wanted his hedgie.

And then it was those damned squirrels again. This time, Lagniappe was inside, playing with his hedgehog, when two squirrels appeared on the deck. I'd left a bag of peanuts out there (Lagniappe loves peanuts) and the squirrels were mounting a raid on the bag. They had climbed up on the lawn chair that the bag was on and were rummaging into the bag, and Lagniappe, on the other side of the glass, saw this. To say that he was upset is an understatement. He ran to the window and he barked at the squirrels and pawed at the glass. But these squirrels obviously understand the concept of glass and they knew that Lagniappe could not get out to get them, so they disregarded him and went right on about their business of looting the peanut bag and shuttling away with the peanuts one after the other, returning time and time again to get more with absolutely no regard for the hysterical German Shepherd on the other side of the window.

Once more, I was drawn by his carrying on and when I saw what was yanking his chain this time, I just had to laugh. And I stood there for about five minutes and watched these two squirrels taking peanut after peanut while Lagniappe watched, growling and crying to no avail. Poor silly dog.

So all in all, it was a frustrating day for Lagniappe, but it ended on a better note--for him at least--when I let him outside just before dusk and he spied one of the many local feral cat in the yard.

Cat lovers would do best to stop reading now.

I let Lagniappe out into his run--his run--and the first thing that we both saw was this stupid feral cat walking along in the run like it hadn't a care in the world. Of course Lagniappe was onto it before I could react, and there was absolutely no calling him back. I rushed out to stop it but to no avail; he had that cat in seconds, and the fight was as brief as it was one-sided. To paraphrase from one of Monty Python's best bits: E's passed on! This cat is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-CAT!

Lagniappe came off without so much as a scratch and he spent the rest of the evening lying on his rug by the door, with his hedgehog, watching the deck and waiting for the squirrels to return.

Who ever knew that a dog's life could be so dramatic?

Obama's useful idiots are worried now that they're no longer useful

The media sycophants that got Obama elected after spending eight years undermining the last President are now worried--and angry--because Obama is bypassing them and going directly to the people, according to a recent Daily Beast article.

This article, which is lengthy enough that I won't reprint it all here, begins with an explanation of how Obama is bypassing (and disrespecting) the mainstream media tools who were his staunchest allies and supporters right up until the point when he no longer needed them and they began to question his policies and direction. Obama is now shutting them out and going around them, and they don't like it.

First, they worry that they may wind up on the scrap heap of obsolescence (and have to go out and get real jobs) now that they're finding themselves supplanted by the young college kids that Obama is hiring to reach out on Twitter and facebook and all of the other "idiot" networks. But then they make the claim that America will somehow be worse off without them because they provide an essential serviced by "filtering" the news--deciding what you and I get to se and hear--and that without them to make those decisions, we'll all somehow become poorer and stupider.

CBS senior White House correspondent Bill Plante isn't shy about his belief that they're smart enough (and trustworthy enough) to decide what information reaches you and I. “In the end, who gets the decent information? The people who rely on trusted filters, whether they’re online or on the air,” Plante replied. “If you do it all yourself, you’re gonna get a load of crap!”

Because you and I...we're not smart enough to figure out what's crap and what's not. We need the media talking heads to tell us, specifically the media talking heads who have consistently demonstrated an open bias towards all things Democrat and against anything conservative or Republican. Yeah...we need that, because we're stupid, right? we need to be told what and how to think and have our information flow restricted to just that which reinforces what the Bill Plantes and the Chris Matthewses want us to think.

The redoubtable (and undeniably leftist) Helen Thomas—who started at the White House covering JFK for United Press International, and still has a front-row seat in the briefing room—is worried that all the downsizing at media outlets will result in less-reliable coverage of the president.

“It’s a tragedy in my book—it means less accountability,” Thomas said. “We certainly haven’t had any news conferences in a long time, which reminds me of Watergate in the sense of a long time of not having press conferences. Obama has given a lot of interviews, but that doesn’t reveal the whole picture at all.”

Thomas, at 89, might have slowed down a bit since her wire-service days, but she’s still combat-ready with a sharply honed question. “The difference between a news conference and interviews is that the questions from the ‘rabble’ will come from left field,” she said, “and they will ask something that will really startle him” and push the president off his talking points.

And that would have been fine if people like Thomas had ever tried to really grill Obama with tough, probing question and throw him off his message. But they didn't, because they were his fans and supporters. In fact, Chris Matthews of MSNBC, one of President Bush's most vitriolic critics, openly admitted that his job was to make the Obama Presidency a success.

That's the kind of "filtering" that we need? I don't think so.

BUt we get still more elitism from Thomas, who decries the fact that people are now directly disseminating information without going through her and her comrades.

“There’s no accountability for a blogger,” she scoffed. “They can ruin lives, reputations, and once you send something into the air, it’s going to land, and there’s nothing that can curb them from saying anything they want. Everybody with a laptop thinks they’re a journalist, and everybody with a cellphone thinks they’re a photographer.”

But what of the media's long history of ruining lives and reputations? Dan Quayle come to mind? Sarah Palin? President Bush and Vice-President Cheney? Was there anything too salacious to refrain from printing about any of these people, or countless others on the political right? I suspect that what she means is that now it'll be that much harder to protect those wrongdoers on the left--like the media tried so hard to do in the case of John "who's-you-daddy?" Edwards. Remember how the media collectively refused to report on that one until the National Enquirer and the bloggers broke it wide open? That kind of selective filtering we can all do well without, thank you very much.

You media folks used to be objective and you scrutinized government with a probing eye on behalf of the public without regard for partisanship. In that regard, you provided America with a valuable service. But then you decided to cash it all in and started using your hard-won credibility to affect and shape public opinion instead of just reporting fairly. The result: Now one side has no use for you, and the team that you chose to support now treats you like a shopworn hooker. The public doesn't trust you any more and there's no way to unring the bell and get your reputation back. Obama will be gone eventually but you'll still stained and mistrusted. So bring on the death of the mainstream media, or at least it's demise as an agenda-driven combine. It can't come too soon in my books.

Shooting and stuff.

So I shot yesterday...Wow. Did I ever.

I got out to the range--this time a private range that's pretty much a dump where you're allowed to shoot up anything to you either find there or bring yourself--hoping to have the place to myself. Unfortunately, there were two other shooters there, a father and his teenage son. Worse, they were "Fudds"--the sort of people who think that their hunting guns are fine but your black rifle/military-surplus rifle/sub-machine gun, etc., are somehow bad. Of course I had all of those with me.

So how did I find out that these two were Fudds? It started with a race for the brass. Both of us got there at the same time, and immediately we saw that the ground was literally covered with fresh brass from what was obviously a heavy shooting week-end. And I'm a big-time brass-scrounger, as when I'm not shooting, I'm reloading. I started scooping it up, and dammit--so did they. No fair! I wanted it ALL!

So being a diplomat, I casually asked the father if he was a reloader. His answer: No, but he's planning on starting someday. Oh, great, I thought. Now I'm losing brass to some joker who is just going to squirrel it away. But sometimes it pays to keep talking, so I asked him what calibers he was looking for, and he replied that he wanted .40 S&W...just .40 S&W.

Well damn--that works for me. I want the rifle brass, the .45 and the Magnum pistol stuff. So I scooped up a few .40 cases and handed them to him. He was pleased and asked me what I wanted. I told him, and before long, the three of us were scarfing up all the cases, and I gave them all the .40 stuff and they gave me everything else. And since there was much more non-.40 and two of them picking, I came out way ahead on that deal.

Of course as we sorted the stuff out, dad made some remark about all of the .223 brass there, probably from AR-15's. He said that it looked like the "Rambos" had been out there.
"Not an AR fan?" I asked. I didn't tell him that one of those evil black rifles was lurking in my truck, right next to a full-auto Uzi SMG.
"Nope. I don't think anyone needs weapons like that. Too many fools out there and that's a bad mix."

Uh, yeah...ok. Whatever.

For a while, we shot. I had my Marlin .357 Magnum lever-gun out, and he was using a Mossberg bolt-action .308, sans scope. His son had a Mossberg pump shotgun that he was using to blast away at things with slugs. But then I exhausted my supply of .357 ammo so I put the hot lever-gun up. We went down to check targets. They were shooting at paper targets they'd stapled to sticks in the ground, and I was firing at those nice orange 4" sporting clays typically used by trap and skeet shooters. I like them because they're easy to see, yet small enough to be at least a bit of a challenge at longer distances...and when you hit them, they break up nicely so you get instant feedback on your shooting. Then the moment arrived--the AR-15 with it's Aimpoint sight came out. I sat down cross-legged on the ground and began to shatter the clays. It's actually way too easy with the Aimpoint--just put the little red dot on the clay, hold the rifle still, touch the trigger, and the clay disappears.

My new shooting partner didn't appear too happy to see this evil black rifle make it's appearance, and I know that he wasn't pleased to see that I was busting the clays at a "1 shot, 1 clay" rate while he was having a hard time keeping his shots on his paper targets that were about the size of a regular sheet of paper. But I was also firing from a solid position and he was leaning half-assedly across the hood of his truck and the his rifle was neither supported nor steady.

Since he'd just done me a good turn and collected a bunch of brass for me, I went over to him during our next cease-fire and offered him a couple of pointers on his stance. He was receptive one thing led to another, and soon I was coaching him. I had him firing from a prone position in the dirt before long and he was actually scoring some pretty good hits. But then he was out of ammo, having only brought two boxes out for that rifle. Seeing a chance to win a Fudd over, I picked up my AR and asked if he'd ever shot one before. As I suspected, he hadn't. So I showed him how it worked, explaining both the rifle and the optic, and coached him through a twenty round magazine. Once he got used to it, he was hitting pretty consistently, and the smile on his face reminded me of the first time I left my nephew, The Spud, shoot a .22. I ran his son through a mag as well, and by the time he was done, it was obvious that they were both in love with that little black carbine. He thanked me for letting them shoot it and as they packed up, he was asking me what they cost and where he could check some out.

I could have been an ass and rubbed his nose in his previous remarks, but honestly, all that would likely have done was make him get all defensive and strengthen his idiotic idea about black guns and the sort of people who own them. As it is now, I think his opinion has changed a bit, and he may actually drop his negative views enough to come over to the dark side, so to speak, and become one of us black rifle owners. Personally, I'd much rather have another ally in the fight against the gun banners than get a cheap "gotcha" in on some guy that I'll probably never see again anyway. As it was, he left with something to think about, and a new-found appreciation for guns that he was willing to support banning just a couple of hours ago. And when I wouldn't let him pay me for the rounds that he and his son fired--just reloads--he handed me two boxes of .308 cases and those, to me, were worth more than 40 bullets and a bit of powder any day!

Afterwards, I got busy and did some tactical work--position-shooting using my vehicle for cover, shooting on the move, barricade work using some debris that was already out there on the range...all perishable skills that need to be practiced. Real bad guys don't just stand still like clays or aluminum cans do--you need to be able to engage them while seeking cover or from cover, and mobility is the key.

And before either you or I starts thinking that I'm all that, I will relate my bone-head move of the day. As I was practicing my shoot-and-scoot with the Uzi, I used my SUV as a barricade, taking cover behind the engine block and intending to fire a few bursts across the hood. Alas, I did not think that one through in regards to the Uzi's ejection port, and as I crouched and fired downrange from behind the front tire, I was much chagrined to see about half a mag's worth of ejected brass impact my windshield like a handful of thrown gravel. DOH! Fortunately there was no damage done, saving me from trying to explain that one to the insurance company. Moral of the story: know your weapon, including where it throws spent brass! That same course of fire with my AR is no problem because my AR throws the brass back a bit. The Uzi chucks it smartly forward, thus ensuring that if I ever have to take a shot like that in real life, I'm really going to try to do it over the hood of someone else's car.

The stars of the day's training: AR-15, Uzi, and Glock 23. (Yeah...I know. But me and this Glock go back a long time.)
Afterwards, I picked up the rest of the brass left lying around--34 lbs of it, mostly rifle brass. (Thanks, Brass Fairy!) Then I headed back to the Lair, with a stop at the prosthetist's office made necessary by all of my kneeling and prone play on the range which tore up the neoprene sleeve on my leg to the point where it needed replacing again. So since it was on the way anyway, I stopped and had a new one fitted instead of breaking into my cache of spares and messing with it myself. (Those things are a royal pain to put on.) As usual, my prosthetist just sighed and shook his head when I walked in, all sweat-soaked and covered with dirt, asking if he had a minute for an emergency repair. After four years, he's used to me routinely tearing up my legs though hard use and just plain abuse. It's kind of a game we play--he builds me better legs, and I test 'em to destruction. For all of the skill he's developing working with me, I really should be charging him instead of the other way around. But he's a good duck so I don't mind.

I finally got home, cleaned up, got a run in--a sadly pathetic run because I've been slacking, but a run nonetheless--and then it was dinner time for me and Lagniappe, followed by a nice evening cleaning the guns and with my music and a large Bushmill's. (Yeah, all the Sean Dillon stories are rubbing off on me.) Sadly, the cleaning got put off, but than anyone who knows me knows that that's not uncommon. I'll clean the Lair one of these days...honest!

Chicks with guns on the rise

OK, five more minutes taken out of my day to post and smile about this article. from the Washington Times. (Thanks, Fuzzy's Dad!)

American women are buying guns and taking aim on firing ranges in growing numbers, according to a recent study and interviews with gun-shop owners.

A 2009 study found 70 percent of shop owners reported more female buyers.

The study, conducted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and Southwick Associates, also found 80 percent of the female gun-buyers who responded said they purchased a gun for self-defense, followed by 35 percent for target practice and 24 percent for hunting.

Women and shop owners interviewed by The Washington Times offered similar, narrow-ranging explanations for the increases — largely self-defense and concerns about the possibility President Obama would further restrict gun ownership.



Erika Gonzalez, of suburban Washington, was raised as a Quaker and grew up thinking guns were unsafe — until a series of life-changing events.


Her grandmother was murdered about 15 years ago in a small town, then her marriage fell apart and she was on her own.

"I was very anti-gun for a long time … and I guess my thinking evolved on that," said Ms. Gonzalez, who owns a Glock 9mm and started a shooting club to practice and share similar interests. "I was probably motivated to buy the gun because I separated from my husband and was living alone."

Hilary Gotzh, a single 26-year-old, wants to buy a gun this year for protection and recreational uses, but, like Ms. Gonzalez, thinks ownership is a private and personal decision.



"It's not a common thing that women sit around tea and talk about their firearms," Ms. Gotzh said.


Jack Donald, a Washington-area gun dealer, said he's noticed a recent increase in female gun sales, with most women looking for protection. He also said he witnessed a surge in overall sales after President Obama was elected in 2009.


"Our gun sales volume increased dramatically after the election," he said.






Despite such observations, a recent National Opinion Research Center study shows the demographics of U.S. gun ownership have changed little during the past 29 years. Women owned roughly 10.5 percent of this country's guns in 1980, compared to 10.8 percent of the more than 200 million guns in the U.S. in 2008.

Photos nabbed from Oleg Volk and inserted by Yours Truly.

Monday morning

And it's a beautiful day, despite my getting the news last night that a relative of mine who has never been known for her sound judgment has apparently met a new guy and moved him right into her place despite her the facts that she can hardly afford to cover her and her kid's bills on her pay and that this guy doesn't have a job. To that relative: Guys aren't going to buy the cow if you give them the milk for free. And to that guy: We haven't met yet but I've got my eye on you. Just so that we're clear, I'm giving you a chance to prove yourself but if you ever hurt her or that child that I adore...well you'd do well to make sure that the people who make milk cartons have got a really good picture of you to put on the side of their products.

Not a sermon; just a suggestion.

Oh, and when we do meet, you might want to have a job, a neat, short haircut, and impeccable manners. That's just another suggestion.



That aside, I have three objectives today:

1. Shoot.
2. Run.
3. Clean the Lair.

I'd better get moving--one of these is going to take me a while.

More Jesus Christ, Superstar

While looking for more decent original videos not long ago, I happened upon this theater group from Holland known as the Vollendam Superstars. These people aren't professionals--they're amateurs and many reportedly don't even speak English other than the lines and songs that they learned for this production. If you listen to their performance, many of them replicate the lines of the original 1973 players right down to accents and inflections. But the result is fantastic, and they deserve a lot of credit.

Most notable though is Jan Dulles, the singer/actor who plays Judas, reprising Carl Anderson's role in the original. Dulles actually has some experience, and he's really, really good. I'm impressed, and I suspect that Carl Anderson would be, too.




Still, I have to give it to the original. Ted Neeley played Jesus well and contrasted perfectly with Anderson's Judas.




Barry Dennan was hard to top as Pontius Pilate, too.



Great productions like this don't come along often, and thirty-five years later, it's still great. Get a copy and watch the whole thing this week-end. You'll enjoy it, and if nothing else, it'll help you remember what Easter's supposed to be about--very real events that took place 2,000 years ago that make all the difference for us today.

Easter Week-end

It's Good Friday today--the day set aside to remember the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. I thought about what to post this week-end. I debated putting up the images of Lagniappe looking at the flat and very dead easter bunny again, but then even though it's funny, I've done that at least twice already.

So setting politics and guns aside for a bit, this year I think I'll post a few videos from my favorite Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, Jesus Christ, Superstar. I'll begin with the opening to the original 1973 film version in which the late Carl Anderson just nails the part of Judas, Jesus' disillusioned and traitorous disciple.

I really like this one, both because Anderson is so good, but also because, in late 2003, I began an e-mail correspondence with Carl Anderson after I (finally) saw this film for the first time and sent him a short e-mail to tell him how impressed I was. We exchanged several e-mails and he told me that he was still touring and promised to arrange a back stage pass to let me meet him during his then-pending show that was going to be near where I was at the time. I was still looking forward to that meeting when I was saddened to read of his death from Leukemia just a few months later. Damn shame. He had real talent and seemed like a nice guy.
So here he is, as Judas, in 1973.

And you wonder why we get unconstitutional legislation?

It's because we have legislators like Phil Hare,(D)-IL, who admits that he doesn't care about the U.S. Constitution then tries to quote it and shows that he doesn't know the difference between that document and the Declaration of Independence.


Hare is backpedaling now and trying to rewrite history on this episode, but a few things are undeniable. Hare, when asked how he could support such an unconstitutional bill, cuts the man off and says "I don't worry about the Constitution on this to be honest..."

"I care more about the people that are dying every day that don't have health insurance," Rep. Hare goes on to say.

"You care more about that than the Constitution you swore to uphold?" the man asks him.

"I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Rep. Hare tells him, quoting not the Constitution but the preamble of the Declaration of Independence.

To quote one of my earliest role models: "What a Maroon."

Now granted, some of Hare's questioners were a bit rude and disrespectful, but Hare didn't exactly rise above it as one might expect a Congressman to be able to do. And even I have to question his claim of having read the Obamacare bill "three times" in the limited time that it was even available in final form. At 2,700 pages, that would actually be 8,100 pages read, as the one questioner states. I would not personally have called Hare a liar to his face--that's just crass and not appropriate when you're trying to have an actual discussion--but I'd have loved to draw him out on that extremely unlikely claim a bit more.

But Hare loses the most points when he just up and walks out. Like it or not, Congressman, you work for those people and had an obligation to try to talk to them instead of sinking to their rather juvenile level and then going even lower.

If you ever need more proof that elections are important, or that we get the government that we deserve, you have only to watch people like Congressman Phil Hare in action. Granted, Illinois' 17th Congressional District appears to be heavily Gerrymandered, undoubtedly to ensure that a Democrat retains the seat, but it's still pathetic that out of that whole area, Hare was the most educated, conversant and diplomatic man that the Democrats and local voters could find for the job.

In sum, we got Obamacare because legislators like Hare are currently in the majority, and we have legislators like Hare because better people decline to run or are rejected by the apathetic and/or ignorant voters who actually show up on election day.

What's that you say? You didn't vote? Well then this mess is partly your fault, too. When smart people shirk their duty to vote, the dim bulbs who show up and the interests that push them to the polls get to decide who makes the laws and appoints the judges.