Not one bit.

Let me say a little something about Fred Phelps.

I believe that he is one of the most horrible people on the planet. I hope he dies in the not too distant future (a hope that I withhold for only the worst human beings).

I hope that when he dies, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people attend his funeral carrying signs that say “God hates Fred Phelps” or something similar.

I hope that when his vile followers see this turnout, they all commit mass suicide and improve the gene pool of the human race.

In spite of all this, I am a bit worried about SCOTUS is granting cert to the Snyder v. Westboro Baptist Church case.

In its last go-round in court it was decided correctly, in accordance with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why do the big boys need to get their hands dirty here? Why does this case need an “Us Too!”
The Rehnquist Court screwed us with Kelo v. City of New London. I don’t want the Roberts Court to make its big screw up this early in its existence.

This string of words are cut from the middle of one speech given yesterday. Other than the start and stop points, the words are unedited as they were published yesterday.

We have to do this in partnership, and I wanted to bring up to date on where we see it from here. The final health care legislation that will soon be passed by Congress will deliver successful reform at the local level.  It will offer paid for investments that will improve health care services and coverage for millions more Americans. It will make significant investments in innovation, prevention, wellness and offer robust support for public health infrastructure.  It will dramatically expand investments into community health centers.  That means a dramatic expansion in the number of patients community health centers can see and ultimately healthier communities.  Our bill will significantly reduce uncompensated care for hospitals.

You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other.  But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket.  Prevention, prevention, prevention—it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting.

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.

—–
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi at the Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties

Anyone else notice how the final sentence cancels out everything she stated in the previous two paragraphs?

She is an idiot. It is a wonder she remembers to breathe.

Without looking at the names, can you guess which state is red and which state is blue by reading this?

So Obambi wants to ban “Sport Fishing”.

I’m thinking it is time to laugh out loud at the folks who put “Sportsmen for Obama” bumperstickers on their cars and trucks.

And then help them to defeat this piece of eco-socialist pap. Because hunting will be next.

There is actually still group at MyBarackObama.Com called “Sportsmen for Obama” but the plan to “forge a broad coalition if we are to address the great conservation challenges” seems to have been removed recently from the “Where Barack Stands” page.

I have a deep certainty that banning sport fishing wasn’t in the plan.

Maybe next time they’ll remember how they were lied to in 2008. Maybe.

Which probably means that it is funny because it is true

(both are click to embiggen)

Found @ JoNova via CCinZ

At SHOT Show I tried out a set of 5.11 Tactical’s “covert” dress shirts with the “concealed carry” pockets, and loved ‘em. No, I didn’t carry a firearm. Instead of a gun, I had spare contact lenses, backup glasses, second wallet, etc. comfortably and unnoticeably ensconced about my torso each day on the SHOT Show floor. Beats stuffing pants pockets, or wearing web gear, all to hell.

As for weapons, I’m a short guy (5′8″), but even on me either of the new S&W Bodyguard guns are pretty much undetectable in this shirt, and any other handgun as lightweight and small (or smaller) just doesn’t print. The Packing Rat witnessed me storing my 940 J-frame in the shirt while in the privacy of my hotel room and the result was barely noticeable if you looked — and that only because the 940 is steel and weighs about 30 ounces loaded; it pulled the shirt down on that side. If balanced with similar weight in the other pocket it wouldn’t be a problem. I’d think a taller person could even carry a lightweight full-sized pistol in this shirt without detection, as shown in the video below:

(video had to be removed due to its horrible HTML code. I’ll try to fix it and get it up later. It should show up below the fold if you want to try that - Phil)

I’ve learned the hard way now several times that if you see something you like in this life, you’d best get it sooner rather than later, because if you wait, when you finally get around to buying it, it’s gone, and you’re in for years of searching on auction sites and craigslist to fill the void.

Of course 5.11 discontinued the covert dress shirt a couple of weeks ago . Why am I telling you about this now? Because I needed to be sure the batches I ordered from a couple different sources ended up in my hot little hands first. I hadn’t bought a new dress shirt in 20 years and was in the process of donating/tossing all the old ones anyway; I now have sufficient covert dress shirts to fill my wardrobe needs for the next 20 years, at which point I should be retired and into Hawaiian shirts anyway. I’m serious — I like these shirts so much that I’m not wearing anything else for the rest of my professional career.

LA Police Gear has ‘em for under $18, quite the savings from the $59 list price. Snicker about “tactical” office wear all you like. I say get ‘em while you can; they’re a great product.

Yes I’m an attorney. No, I am not your attorney, and nothing in this post constitutes legal advice or opinion.
(Push the button … )

Luckily, it’s easy to combat this effect with a simple technique called “Parenting”.

Communist totalitarianism’s scars run deep. Michael Totten writes a great article. The photo of the gigantic carbuncle of a parliament building is one of the better visual representations of collectivist statist architecture. Go read.

“Communism changed our mentality,” said Daniel Apostol, editor in chief of Romania’s Money Channel. “We are still fighting now to come back to what we were. We lost the culture of private property. We lost this sense of privacy and respecting each other’s time and respecting people as individuals, as human beings. That was the worst thing that happened to us. This is why we are struggling so much now to get back to the capitalist society, to the free market, which can run only if there is respect for private property.”

“You had to learn these concepts as an adult?” I said.

“Yeah,” he said. “We didn’t have it before. And we are still learning it. We cannot just one day say, ‘Ok, we get it.’”

Yes I’m an attorney. No, I am not your attorney, and nothing in this post constitutes legal advice or opinion.

And a stark reminder as to why it is so important to fight for gun rights.

Once again, the brass is letting the boots down.

Operations in Afghanistan frequently require United States ground forces to engage and destroy the enemy at ranges beyond 300 meters. These operations occur in rugged terrain and in situations where traditional supporting fires are limited due to range or risk of collateral damage. With these limitations, the infantry in Afghanistan require a precise, lethal fire capability that exists only in a properly trained and equipped infantryman. While the infantryman is ideally suited for combat in Afghanistan, his current weapons, doctrine, and marksmanship training do not provide a precise, lethal fire capability to 500 meters and are therefore inappropriate.

Comments from returning non-commissioned officers and officers reveal that about fifty percent of engagements occur past 300 meters. The enemy tactics are to engage United States forces from high ground with medium and heavy weapons, often including mortars, knowing that we are restricted by our equipment limitations and the inability of our overburdened soldiers to maneuver at elevations exceeding 6000 feet. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain.

Maj. Thomas P. Ehrhart - Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afghanistan: Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer

I’ve had this for almost two weeks now (found via Winds of Change), but getting ready for finals at school has kept me from remembering where I’d placed the link.