Justice Dept. Goes Easy on the Shoe Bomber

The U.S. Department of Justice has decided to lighten up on convicted shoe bomber, Richard Reid.

Reid, you may remember, is the terrorist (oops! is it still politically correct to use that word?) who tried to blow up American Airlines flight 63 from Paris to Miami in February, 2002 by igniting explosives hidden in his shoe. Fortunately, a passenger noticed Reid trying to light the fuse, and flight attendants took him down and subdued him until the Boeing 767 landed in Boston.

Reid was incarcerated in federal prison here in Colorado along with other nasty pieces of work such as four of the terrorists--including leader Ramzi Yousef--responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, co-conspirator of 9-11 Zacharias Moussaoui, Jose Padilla -- the Dirty Bomber, and Bin Laden's personal assistant (use your imagination...) Wadih el-Hage.

Reid complained to prison authorities that he was being prevented from conducting daily group prayers as dictated by his religion. This seems a little strange to me: First, it implies that Muslims cannot pray alone, only in groups. Second, it seems like an excuse for a mini terrorists convention at the prison every day. Third, if Reid was so concerned about his religious freedom, maybe he should have considered the consequences before he tried to murder a plane-load of people, forever robbing 197 souls of all their freedoms, religious and otherwise!

But that's OK, under "special administrative measures"(SAM), the federal prison authorities have not been allowing Reid to contact the other terrorist prisoners, so who cares what he thinks? Well, since Reid is incarcerated on U.S. soil, he is protected by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and religion, just like the rest of us. And now, the Justice Dept. has seen fit to suspend those SAMs. Amazing. Next thing you know, we'll be closing the Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorists and sending the inmates to a tropical paradise to serve out their time...Oh yeah, I forgot; we're already doing that.

Senator Barbara Boxer is at it Again

A while ago, US Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) reprimanded a Brigadier General during a senate hearing for calling her "Ma'am", saying that she worked hard to earn the title of Senator. Never mind that in the US military, it's customary to address women as Ma'am as a sign of respect.

Not content with upbraiding a senior military officer, during a recent senate committee hearing, the senator also offended Harry C. Alford the head of the Black Chamber of Commerce by presenting an opposing view to that held by the BCC on energy policy, from two other black organizations: The NAACP, and One Hundred Black Men.

Boxer might just as well have said that because Mr. Alford's Black Chamber of Commerce does not share the same official position as her, she found another black organization that does. The video tells the whole story (click here).

So how come we haven't heard complaints from Jesse Jackson or the Reverend Al Sharpton? Simple. Who's side would they take in a fight between a white liberal woman and a black conservative man? Better to stay out of this one altogether.

"God, Guns, Guts, and American Made Pickup Trucks"

Here's an interesting piece of video from CNN. The reporter is interviewing a car dealer in a rural part of the United States, where they are giving away a free AK-47 with every purchase of a new vehicle. The car buyer must still obtain the rifle through a local gun dealer, and go through the usual criminal background check, etc. before actually taking possession and ownership of the firearm.

The interview is interesting because it highlights the difference in cultural attitudes between urban and rural people. It's worth noting that the CNN reporter is unable to clearly articulate her concerns about this gun giveaway, while the car dealer has no problems explaining why a legally-owned, semi-auto AK is a viable option for people who live 15 minutes away from the closest police response want to defend their homes from violent criminals. Click here to watch the interview.

You can also take the poll in the top right corner of this page.

Will Members of Congress Have the Same Healthcare as the Rest of Us?

(Photo. Representative John Fleming (R- 4th District, Louisiana) meets with health care professionals at a Louisiana hospital)

Imagine a hypothetical situation some time in the not-too-distant future where you are sitting in the waiting room of a government-run doctor's office, waiting several hours to see a doctor:

The door opens, and in walks Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) she's there for her regular procedure, a short operation that the doctor calls a cranial-rectal separation (it involves a winch, a tow rope, and a baseball catcher's mitt). Anyway, in this imaginary scenario, she sits down next to you and begins to complain about the healthcare system.

"But," you say, "don't all members of Congress have their own health care plan?"

"Not any more," the Speaker grumbles, "Some republican house rep from Louisiana introduced legislation that makes congress use the same universal health care as the rest of you."

And here is where we leave fantasy behind and return to reality. Because, a Louisiana congressman has actually introduced legislation that will do just that. It will make our elected officials subject to the same government health care that the rest of us peons will have to endure.

Representative John Fleming (R- 4th District, Louisiana) has introduced House Resolution 615 that will make politicians give up their own expensive health care plans (The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program) and use the same government-run health care that they are trying to impose on the rest of us. Congressman Fleming was recently interviewed on Fox News, and stated that 48 Republicans have signed onto his resolution, while not one single Democrat has. Not One. But that's OK, you can go to the congressman's website and view the list of politicians who have agreed to abide by the same law as the rest of us. Is YOUR congressman there? Click on this link to find out. Incidentally, I'd like to thank one of Colorado's Congressmen, Rep. Doug Lamborn (R - 5th District) for signing on.

If you don't see your congress critter's name on the list, and you feel that what's good enough for the rest of us is good enough for our elected representatives, you can download a letter of support to send to your elected House Representative in Washington D.C.

It looks Like Judge Sotomayor will be Confirmed

It's looking like Judge Sonia Sotomayor will make it out of the Senate hearings on her confirmation to the Supreme Court pretty much unscathed. I watched some of the hearings this week, and she does seem to have a pretty good idea of what judges should, and should not do.

I do wish she had been more forthright when questioned by republican senators about her view of the Second Amendment, particularly since it's likely that another gun rights case--such as last year's landmark Heller v. D.C. decision--will make its way to the Supreme Court some time during her career (which is a lifetime appointment.)

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said that her judicial record is, "generally in the mainstream", "not an activist", and went on to say that he thought Judge Sotomayor would keep an open mind on gun rights. I think Senator Graham is a smart and capable man, and I hope he's right. The Second Amendment, which states that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." is, to most people, self-explanatory. All I ask is that any judge who has to make a ruling based upon those words from the Bill of Rights takes them at face value. I hope that Judge Sotomayor will do that.

One Democrat's views on Cap and Trade

Recently, my wife wrote to Congressman Jared Polis, (Democrat, Second Congressional District, Colorado) asking him to vote against the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, also called the Cap and Trade bill, currently under consideration by the in Congress. Cap and Trade is the energy bill that if passed, would, according to the Heritage Foundation, cost each American household "3,000 per year".

According to Newsmax, House Minority Leader John Boehner claims the legislation will send many jobs overseas and put "millions of Americans out of work".

Newsmax also quoted President Obama as saying that under Cap and Trade, "...electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

This sounds like a pretty serious piece of legislation. It sounds like there should be some pretty serious debate and discussion between legislators, and also between the Congress and the American public. After all, isn't that why we call our legislators in Washington "elected representatives"?

So when my wife wrote to Representative Jared Polis (Democrat, Second Congressional District, Colorado) we expected a detailed, reasoned response. Here's the congressman's email in it's entirety:

"Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition/support for H.R. XXX, the XXXX Act of 2009. I appreciate hearing from you on these important issues, and I apologize for any delay in my reply. Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. Although we disagree on this issue, I hope my letter clarifies why I voted for this bill/ I hope my letter addresses your particular concerns.> If I can be of any further assistance on this or any other issue, please do not hesitate to contact me at (303) 484-9596. I also encourage you to visit my website,
www.polis.house.gov, and sign up to receive my e-newsletter."

Now I ask you, is it any wonder that Americans are so disillusioned and frustrated with our elected officials? The only conclusion I can reach, when reading drivel like this is that many of our politicians don't give a damn about our opinions. After reading a few replies like this one, how many citizens would simply throw up their hands and say,"forget this. it just isn't worth my time to write to these people."

...hmmm...could it be?...no...surely that couldn't be the reason.

Could it?

Will the NRA sink Judge Sotomayor's Confirmation to the Supreme Court?

Maybe. The issue is that the Second Circuit Court ruled in the Maloney v. Cuomo case, that the Second Amendment does not apply to state and local governments, Judge Sotomayor, President Obama's pick to replace Justice Souter on the Supreme Court, joined the court's opinion. The result of this case implies that individual states may have the right to ban guns.

This means that if confirmed, Sotomayor would sit on the Supreme Court, in judgment of any gun rights cases that came along. It seems strange to me that the framers of the Constitution would have written the Second Amendment to protect the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms at the Federal level, but that they would have not intended that the same right would be extended to the individual states.

Stay tuned, this is going to get interesting...

Governor Palin Will Step Down

Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska has announced that on July 26th, she will resign as Governor of Alaska, and hand over the state to the Lt. Governor Sean Parnell.

At this point, speculation abounds, but it seems she has three choices: Work to get other conservative republicans elected, prepare for a run for the Presidency in 2012, or run for a U.S. Senate seat as one of the two senators from Alaska.

It's interesting that the Governor made a couple of comments in her announcement today that her heart belongs to Alaska, and that she will continue to work for Alaska. To me, that sounds like she will run for a Senate seat, but to do that she must defeat the republican incumbent senator, Lisa Murkowski, who was appointed to that position by her father, Gov. Murkowski, the previous governor of Alaska.

My money is on a senate run. And we certainly could all benefit from that. Having Palin as a conservative, pro-gun senator from Alaska might help to offset the socialist bias that the senate now has, and the 60-vote Democrat super majority that the appointment of television clown and humorist Al Franken (Minnesota) delivered last Thursday with his win over the republican incumbent.

We'll see if I'm right, but my money is on the senate run. The Senate would certainly benefit from a female senator who has run a state, believes in the right to keep and bear arms, and is a conservative with a backbone. When was the last time we had one of those?

"We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident"

To coin a phrase from the Marine Corps: This is my flag. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

It has flown outside our house for several years, and the wind and weather have taken their toll on it. So, it seems fitting that we replace it on Independence Day with a new, and this time, a slightly larger flag. But while times change, it is still Old Glory, the Stars and Stripes. It still conveys the same message that we are all free people, part of a democratic republic, and that (as it says in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence) "...We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness..."

Today, July Fourth, is Independence Day in America.

While the Congress officially separated the American colonies from Great Britain on July second, 1776, it did not officially approve the letter to King George (the Declaration of Independence) until July fourth. From that day on, Americans have always celebrated our independence from the Crown on the fourth. And it's always been a joyous and festive occasion!

John Adams, one of the original signers, wrote this to his wife, Abigail: "...I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.”

Let's celebrate! Happy Birthday, America.

Forget Hello Kitty, Meet Cornershot Kitty

The Cornershot is basically a rifle stock with a hinge halfway. The back half of the stock fits into the shoulder like a rifle, while the front half allows a pistol and a video camera to be mounted. This means that the operator can not only see around corners, while staying behind cover, he can also film what he sees, and he can also shoot what he sees. I examined one of these devices at the SHOT show a couple of years back. It's a good tool for a law enforcement officer or a soldier because he doesn't have to stick his head out from cover to see what is going on around the corner. This is an Israeli product, but the idea seems to have originated with the Nazis during WWII, when they bent the barrels on some of their rifles and machine pistols (see photo).

Well now, the Cornershot comes with a fake cat (think glove puppet) that is hollow, and fits over the pistol. The back legs of the fake cat cover the legs of a bipod, if one is fitted. The purpose of the cat is to camouflage the pistol, so that a bad guy who spots it simply thinks there is a cat standing by the corner, watching him. By the time the bad guy figures out what is going on, he's probably been shot a couple of times. Click here to watch the video.

British Soldiers plus German Rifles equals Neutralized Terrorists

The London Daily Telegraph reports that troopers of Britain's Special Air Service (SAS) made a nighttime High Altitude Low Opening (HALO) parachute jump on the outskirts of Baghdad recently. The covert insertion was part of a mission to locate insurgent leaders and bomb-making factories.

It's interesting that even with all the talk about U.S. forces pulling out of Iraq, there still seems to be an active terrorist presence almost on the doorstep of the Green Zone. But enough of armchair strategy.

Here's the interesting part of the story: The SAS has now added Heckler & Koch's new battle rifle to its armory, the HK417. So now you have British soldiers using German rifles. Sir Winston Churchill might have been shocked, but actually it's nothing new. Everybody from the SAS to the british Metropolitan Police Force has used the German-built HK MP5 submachine guns for more than twenty years.

You may be familiar with H&K's 416, a M16 clone chambered in 556NATO, but the 417 is the big brother. It's chambered in 762NATO, has the same controls in the same places as the ubiquitous M16 (so it's easy for troops trained on the M16/M4/AR-15 platform to switch to the 417) but is also capable of being used as either a Close Quarters Battle (CQB) weapon, or as a precision rifle for long distance engagements (okay, so it's also a sniper rifle). Simply change the barrel from the 12 or 16-inch versions to the 20-inch barrel, and add a long-range scope. Voila!

When the M16 rifle was first fielded in Vietnam in the mid-sixties, the idea was that the 5.56mm cartridge was lighter than the 7.62 cartridge, so more of it could be carried into battle. While this was considered a good thing, it did not take into account a couple of other important factors: The 5.56 mm bullet does not fly as far as its heavier 7.62 mm counterpart, and the 55-70 grain projectile doesn't always put the other guy down as effectively as the 147 grain bullet in the 762NATO round. Arguably, this did not matter too much in the jungles of Vietnam, where enemy soldiers weighed about 110 LBS, wore only light uniforms, and were most likely engaged from zero to maybe a hundred yards or a bit more. And don't get me wrong, the 556NATO cartridge does put the bad guys down. It's just that the devil is in the details: does it do it at long distance? Does it take more than one solid hit?

However, the 762NATO round does a much better job than the 556NATO of penetrating barriers and unarmored vehicles like cars and trucks. During the U.S invasion of Panama in 1989 to arrest Manuel Noriega, the U.S. forces used the standard M16 rifle almost exclusively. However, when they came across heavily barracaded villas owned by Noriega's henchmen, they found that the 556NATO round was unable to shoot through the barriers. There were a few urgent calls placed stateside to fly down some mothballed, M14 rifles (chambered in 762NATO) to fix the problem. Ironically, the M14 was the standard U.S. service rifle early on in the Vietnam war (and was replaced by the M16) but with it's wooden stock, 7.62 caliber, and twenty-round magazine, was considered by some to be outdated when compared to the sleek little M16 with plastic stock and pistol grip, aluminum frame, and smaller 556NATO chambering.

So in the deserts of the middle east, where distances to targets can go from zero to a thousand yards (and those targets are a bit heavier built than Vietnamese people) it makes sense to use a cartridge that performs at extended distances. Particularly when, like the SAS on their Baghdad mission, you infil by parachute and don't have to hump a lot of ammo all day like the guys in Vietnam did on patrol.

Different strokes for different wars, I guess.