...I guess I have ended the week with yet another rant. But in defending the Second Amendment, I remember what someone once said to me, "No fucking compromise."

Exactly.

Anyway, thanks to all of you who write in and who visit me here at Alphecca. I know it's become my slogan but I certainly don't consider it a cliche: Thanks for stopping by! Please visit again.

As usual, I take Saturday off and so I will resume my ranting and raving Sunday night. Have a great weekend everyone. My best to you, to yours, and my prayers go out to all of our brave men and women protecting us all over the world and especially in Iraq.

...and they've had so many of them, from the Twin Cities Press. Once again they are pissing in the wind to oppose the legislation that would relax "concealed carry" laws in Minnesota. Here's a quote from the start:

This editorial board has consistently opposed legislation that would make it easier for Minnesotans to legally carry guns. We oppose such proposals still, believing more guns in our communities would make them not safer, but more hazardous.

Capitol watchers, however, think it more likely this year than before that the Legislature might enact some kind of "shall issue" bill, under which law enforcement authorities would be required to issue gun permits to applicants unless there is a specific statutory reason to deny them. Under current law, applicants must demonstrate to a sheriff or police chief a specific safety concern that justifies their carrying a weapon.

Well first of all, they admit they are anti-Second Amendment. They believe, inspite of all the statistics, that allowing the average citizen to carry a gun will somehow not reduce crime. The real truth is -- of course -- that the one thing mutant criminals fear most is an armed person. Huh? Yes, when a person can carry a gun, he or she stops being a victim and becomes (or should I say resumes being) a citizen. The worst nightmare a thug has is trying to assault an armed citizen. Every single legitimate statistic proves it.

And why wouldn't -- or rather shouldn't -- authorities issue a carry permit to an applicant who doesn't have a criminal or "mental" reason not too? What exactly is this lame newspaper editorialist objecting to?

And lastly but most importantly, why should a citizen who wants a carry permit have to state a "specific safety concern that justifies their carrying a weapon?" All they should have to say is that they believe in the Second Amendment and they want to bear a firearm. They shouldn't even have to do that! They should just say, "hey, I want one. The Bill of Rights says I can have one. Give me the damn permit." And that should be the end of it. Hey, Hey, HEY! I demand that you let me exercise my Constitutional Rights. I want a gun, I want to carry it, I've done nothing wrong -- get out of the way. That's how it should be. In my world that's how it would be.

Serenity now... serenity now...

I guess it's just that I get so pissed off that our Constitution and Bill of Rights in this country has been so whittled down that now we have to beg for the simple promises made to us by our founding fathers. We've forgotten how we were founded. We've forgotten what made this country great. And we've long ago dismissed the rights that made this country strong and unassailable.

Love or hate it, the only reason America is as strong as it is and is as free as it is is because we are the only nation in the world that allows it's citizens to take their defense into their own hands. No evil government can be forced on us. No evil country can invade us. No one can touch us because our Bill of Rights, and the collateral writings of our founding fathers prove this, we have the right to defend and protect ourselves. No other nation on Earth possesses this extraordinary RIGHT. It is our RIGHT. It is not a privilege, or a grant, or a whim. It is an absolute God given right, written into the code of the documents that represent and form the basis of our government. The Second Amendment, and for that matter the First Amendment, are the reason America is the greatest nation on Earth and probably in the whole universe. How dare anyone question it or doubt it or try to take it away from us.

I've discovered another blogger who "blogrolls" me: Fresh + Juicy. Of course he lists me as only an "occasional read" but hey, that's better then nothing. So go visit him and tell him I sent you. Maybe He'll visit me more often.

And this is just (yes, once again) a reminder that if you are a blogger and you are kind enough to add me to your blogroll, please email me (don't be shy) and let me know. I will quickly add you to my blogroll. I really do appreciate it. We all have to help each other get our blatherings out.

I received one critique of my new format on "quotes." Yes, Internet Explorer shows the quotes (in TT font) rather dimly but it shows well enough, and Netscape shows it very well and as I am totally anti-Bill Gates, I now code to Netscape. I have no idea how other browsers treat my HTML because I don't have them.

So here are some of the latest comments I've received from my posts. All of them are from good friends of Alphecca... Firstly, OldeForce writes in about my comments about Michael Moore:

See the April issue of NRA's "American Freedom" magazine for an excellent article on Moore and "Bowling for Columbine." The movie isn't so much anti-gun as it is a rant against America.

Yes. My problem with Moore is that he falsified many of the segments of "Bowling for Columbine." And he's an egotistical creep. And, as you say, he doesn't have the slightest clue as to how most Americans (not living on the two coasts) feel about anything. And he's still prattling on and on about the election. He needs a life and I hope it's somewhere where no media is present so I don't have to listen to his big fat white mouth...

---

There were a couple comments about my rant against NPR (just scroll a few inches down for those.) Both from very good friends. The first is from blogger Leigh Hanlon at HanlonVision:

Regarding NPR, I'd be thrilled if they'd say foreign words in English. I cringe whenever I hear "neek-a-WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH-gwa" or "izz-RYE-ALE-eeeeeeeees" or "saw-OOOOOH-dees." To be consistent, shouldn't they apply dialectical pronunciations to names of people and places in the English-speaking world, too? The comedic opportunities covering New York and Texas or India and Pakistan are boundless.

And yet, Leigh, this is how they think they are showing Americans how much "in touch" they are with the world. They really think they have some deep insight into these foreign countries because they've lived there for all of two weeks and spoken to some dissidents who hate America.

You know, I remember a critique of a TV special where the reporter interviewed prostitutes. The writer pointed out that the prostitutes earned their money by telling the "customer" what he wanted to hear. So it is with a dirt-poor resident of Iraq; that citizen (read: subject) will tell the reporter anything that will advance that reporter's agenda if he/she can get water/food/sympathy out of it. And if Saddam's minions happen to see it, they won't shoot him/her to death.

My friend, blogger Chris at Queen City, writes:

Enjoyed your rant, because it sums up everything I've been thinking as I've listened to NPR. Yesterday I couldn't take it anymore and listened to music on my drive home, something I haven't done in like 10 years. (I am {was} very loyal to NPR). Listening to the press briefings has been just as infuriating as the news stories. I know reporters are supposed to be skeptical and ask tough questions, but these guys frame their questions in ways that show them to be arrogant jerks.

I made up a "typical" asinine question and put it on my blog. Seriously, I wouldn't be shocked anymore if I heard something like it.

Again, I agree. Look, any radio or tv station has the right to put forth their view. The problem I have when NPR does it is that a good percentage (I think -- but I'm too lazy to look it up right now --) about 25% of NPR's funding comes from federal money -- that is taxpayer dollars. Well hey! I'm a taxpayer. And I don't like their slant. And I resent their "reporters'" self-righteous arrogance in their stories, as if we are all stupid rubes who couldn't possibly understand the world without their selfless, benevolent assistance...

Anyway, thanks to all of you for your comments. As I have in the past, I post all comments even if they are very critical of me. Few other bloggers do that. I try to be fair.

...I feel better after last night's rant. But I guess I don't really hate liberals or think they're all stupid. Just the ones running NPR and the BBC. NPR especially drives me up the wall. There is absolutely no balance to anything they "report" on. *Sigh*

OK, so on my day off I'm stuck at home while workmen try to figure out how to put in a chimney liner. I can't go anywhere so I've had a drink and I'm pissed off. Here's why: We've been into this Iraq conflict all of about six days and all the stupid shits in the media are trying to second guess our leaders. "Oh, we're doing this wrong, we should have done that, America calls this 'democracy?" and "Colin Powell should resign!"

Hey fuck you, you asshole Monday quarterback-reporters -- and that includes all the tired old retired generals who failed during the first go-around and are now trying to pad their resumes by commentating for NBC -- shut your big fat mouths.

And because I don't have cable or a dish, I'm stuck with the pansies on NPR who hate America and can't find a single person to interview who has anything nice to say about us. Of course, they fail to realize that dissidents such as themselves are routinely shot to death or worse in totalitarian countries ruled by crap like Saddam Hussein. You notice they have never critiqued all the astounding human-rights violations Saddam has perpetrated. That would somehow indicate that they (Saddam, the Baath party, etc.) are bad. And in the minds of sick liberal jerks like every single employee of NPR, that can't be true. I mean, come on, America is evil and if they are against something, then we -- the left-wing fascists of NPR -- can't possibly support them.

So let's start with an article in the Washington Post today. Here's a quote:

The Pentagon acknowledged striking targets in a residential Baghdad neighborhood that may have caused civilian damage or deaths Wednesday and blamed Iraqi forces for placing military equipment there.

The statement came hours after Iraqi defense officials said two cruise missiles struck a residential area, killing 14 people, in the worst single reported instance of civilian deaths since the U.S. bombing campaign began a week ago.

Hey folks, the "friends of Saddam," that is his minions, have dressed as civilians in order to surrender and then shoot us in the back. They shoot at us from hospitals, hide behind innocent civilians, and try and do every other sick trick in their bag of deceit. As many in the blog world have said, it's time we stopped being so PC and used our real fire-power to humble these mutant thugs. And yet, you (reasonable person that you are) know perfectly well that we don't want to do that and unfortunately that hampers us. We chose a wrong target or a bomb went astray. Too bad. When it's all over, despite the shits at NPR and the BBC, the Iraqi citizens will rush up to and embrace us. We will have liberated them from one of the most hideous regimes on Earth.

And, what a surprise, the Palistinians are -- once again -- siding with the wrong side of history and reality.

I just thought I'd throw that observation in for the few, stupid liberals who visit here.

Now here's a real stupid suggestion: That Colin Powell should quit. Here's a quote:

On Saturday, Bill Keller, a prominent commentator for the influential New York Times, suggested in a widely-reprinted column that the secretary should quit because the war against Iraq was "a failure of Colin Powell's politics."

"The most important reason the secretary of state should go is that the president has chosen a course that repudiates much of what Mr Powell has stood for -- notably his deep suspicion of arrogant idealism," Keller wrote in the piece entitled "Why Colin Powell Should Go."

The column was notable because Keller, who has written positively of Powell in the past, said he continued to have the utmost respect for the secretary but felt that the Bush administration was undeserving of his services.

Yes, Powell has not agreed totally with President Bush's plan, but he is on board now and he has done his job well and Keller -- a lame reporter working for a newspaper now long discredited as a reliable source of unbiased news -- doesn't have a clue as to what goes on behind the scenes of U.S. policy. Bush is smarter then most liberals give him credit for and has established a "good-cop, bad-cop" policy. Powell has been the good-cop trying to get people to see the light of day (and freedom and liberation and on-and-on,) and in reality he is far more conservative then most reporters give him credit for. Bush is using all of his cards and has used Powell to try to get as many countries on board with us as he can. He's done well and he gave a very good accounting of himself at all of his appearances at the U.N. But now President Bush has cut to the chafe.

And we now know who supports us and who doesn't. It all goes back to that simple equation: Either you are part of the solution or you are part of the problem. President Bush understands this. So does Colin Powell. Liberals never will. We will win this thing and liberals will tear their hair out over it. Just as they were wrong about our actions in Afghanistan, so they are wrong about what we are trying to do in Iraq.

And I keep thinking about last week when the U.S. started selected bombing in Iraq, that is -- trying to get Saddam in his bunker. At the very same time, we launched a thousand troops into Afghanistan to round-up some Al Quada members.. Now I suppose this could be interpreted as our brave and proud military trying to prove that -- yes, they can walk and chew gum at the same time. But in any event, it shows we have not abandoned Afghanistan and we continue to clean things up there and go after the garbage that attacked our country.

Can I just say something here? All the crappy French and Germans and liberals question why America should be acting as the police of the world. Pretty simple, really, because no one else -- no other country -- can or will. And these same leftist liberals keep asking why we don't intervene elsewhere. Give us time and we will. We represent the best that humanity has come up with and we will continue to liberate and feed and comfort all who are oppressed. And we will continue to strive to rid this world of fascist thugs and dictators who terrorize their subjects.

Several weeks ago I said, in essence, that we shouldn't be framing the reasons of this war with Iraq in terms of "weapons of mass destruction" but should instead simply state that for humanitarian reasons we are liberating the citizens of Iraq from the most murderous, torturous, evil regime that has ever existed on this planet since Hitler.

And I have to tell you that even with mistakes and errors on our part, when all is said and done and this conflict is finally over with, the Iraqi people (well, most of them who didn't depend on Saddam for their corrupted livelihood) will be thanking us and embracing us and as big as our U.S. hearts are, we will embrace them and care for them right back. That's how we (Americans) are.

Naturally, all the young, inexperienced, liberally indoctrinated youth of our country will find fault with us but the young have always been stupid and they'll have their "vomit-protests" because they can't begin to understand how life operates. Their liberal teachers offer only one side of the debate and these children have no real clue as to how the world really works. How sad. And what a failure on the part of our educational system.

I have said recently that I am unsure of this comflict. This isn't a "warblog" and I'm no expert on anything. But if you really want to know the truth, I think we are probably doing the right thing trying to liberate Iraq. And I believe that history will judge us with favor. So I guess I'm a "war-monger." I'm with President Bush, and especially I am with our military forces fighting to bring freedom from oppression to countries such as Iraq. History will prove us correct. And honorable. And worthy of praise.

Okay, that's the end of tonight's rant... I know I'm not the sharpest tack in the box but I appreciate your visit here. Thanks for stopping by and please do visit again. I take Thursdays off so I'll see you all back here Friday night. Same Bat-channel. God bless our troops and their mission.

Good friend to Alphecca, Chris, writes in:

So Howard Dean thinks North Korea is a bigger threat than Iraq. But he doesn't tell us what he would do. Perhaps we should get the UN Security Council to pass a resolution, which France would veto, to ask them pretty please to stop building nukes. Just what does Howard suggest?

And as we've seen time and again, the U.N. has been absolutely useless in enforcing any of the resolutions the Security Council passes. Indeed -- North Korea tosses their inspectors out of the country and turns off the cameras. If further declares it is starting up it's nuclear reacters again and the U.N. does... Nothing!

You're also right that Dean offers no suggestion on what America should do. I wouldn't be surprised if France and Germany and Russia are also selling sensitive merchandise to North Korea as we've discovered they have to Iraq.

Say, how many Frenchmen does it take to roast a chicken?

They can't do it -- they're not cannibals.

So here's my weekly rating of the bias of the stories and editorials on the Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page. The real bias --of course-- is in their selection.

Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page Articles
Sample Date	For More Gun Control Or Is Anti-Gun	Not More Gun Control Or Is Pro 2nd Amendment	Neutral Articles	Concurrent Events Notes
03/26/03	11	5	4
03/19/03	10	5	5	Good news in Illinois and Colorado
03/11/03	12	4	4	Judge dismisses gun makers as defendants in suit
03/05/03	11	2	7
Feb. Avg.	11	2	7	Colorado laws, S&W .50 revolver, Ashcroft/ATF prosecutions
Jan. Avg.	15	2.5	3	Ashcroft, sniper victim lawsuits, England gang murders/ban on toy guns
Dec. Avg.	14	4	3	Canadian Registry fiasco & NJ "smart-gun" law
Nov. Avg.	17	3	2	D.C. snipers

Not much to report this week -- in fact almost nothing at all. Only one new editorial was added by Yahoo and that was Jacob Sullum's editorial regarding the suit filed by the NAACP against gun makers. One story dropped off, and after re-reading every link, I changed my opinion on a couple of stories and placed them in other columns.

So instead, for your viewing pleasure, I bring back the chart. Just click it for a pop-up enlargement.





So you can see the chart shows the "bump" up in stories favoring our side. Again, this mostly reflects the California judge dismissing gun makers as defendants in suits filed by several cities as well as the stories about Daley's defeat in Illinois and Gov. Owens signing into law a couple of bills in Colorado that support the Second Amendment. Nothing else to talk about here...

Michelle Malkin reports in the Washington Times on the latest screed from the Earth Liberation Front. Here's a quote from the ELF on actions citizens should take:

(1) Attack the financial centers of the country. Using covert or black block techniques ... physically shut down financial centers which regulate and assist the functioning of U.S. economy. This can be done in a variety of ways from massive property destruction, to online sabotage, to physical occupation of buildings.

(2) Large-scale urban rioting. With massive unrest and even state of emergencies declared in major cities across the country, the U.S. government will be forced to send U.S. troops into the domestic arena, thereby taking resources and political focus away from the war.

(3) Attack the media centers of the country. ... Using any means necessary, shut down the national networks of NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, etc. Not just occupations but actually engage in strategies and tactics which knock the networks off the air.

(4) Spread the battle to the individuals responsible for the war and destruction of life ‹ the very heads of government and U.S. corporations. No longer should these people be able to hide behind their occupations, living their lives in peace while they simultaneously slaughter countless people. Hit them in their personal lives, visit their homes, and make them feel personally responsible for committing massive atrocities.

(5) Make it known publicly that this movement does not support U.S. troops as long as they are serving an unjust and horrifying political regime. Create an atmosphere lacking of support to assist U.S. troops at home and abroad in losing their morale and will to fight. If you are supporting the troops, you are supporting this war and the very U.S. government that is the primary terrorist regime in the international arena.

(6) Actively target U.S. military establishments within the United States ... use any means necessary to slow down the functioning of the murdering body.

(7) When engaging in the above six activities, strike hard and fast and retreat in anonymity. ... Do not get caught. Do not get sent to jail. Stay alert, keep active, and keep fighting. Remember, an action is only good (especially at this juncture in U.S. society) if it will serve to severely disrupt the political system of the country, its economy, and the corporate interests that drive this society.

Malkin nails these sick jerks right in the head. Go read the whole frightening article. It scares me that those on both the far-left and the far-right keep exhorting people to resort to violence. What they don't seem to get is that if there were any validity to their arguments, they wouldn't need to commit such savage acts. Americans are smart and reasonable and will listen to well made points of view and often adopt them. But if your message is shrouded in hysteria then everyone just tunes you out.

As the late Isaac Asimov used to say, "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."

Of course, some could apply that quote to our current actions in Iraq. As I've said before, I'm not especially for or against... There does come a point where it is do-or-die. That's why I carry a firearm. There are no easy answers. Ah, the times we live in.

Anyway, I'll be back tomorrow with my weekly bias-check table. Thanks for stopping by!

... in the Washington Post about why it is way too early for folks to get discouraged by the (or some would say supposed lack of) progress in the war. Here's a quote:

There really was no answer to such concerns yesterday, other than the obvious one: The war was but five days old. After that short time it was too early to judge how prolonged or difficult the conflict might be. Optimists could point to the rapid advance of U.S. infantry and Marines toward Baghdad, pessimists to the willingness of significant numbers of Iraqis to fight and their use of desperate tactics. The best-case scenario, of an immediate collapse of Iraqi resistance, has been ruled out, but some of the worst cases so far have been avoided, too -- oil fields have been spared from destruction, Israel has been kept out of the war, and no weapons of mass destruction have been used on allied troops or Iraqi civilians.

Read the whole thing for some good perspective on how we define "progress." And on how everyone needs to step back and let the conflict unfold at whatever pace it will.

I've already posted several times on Michael Moore and his fake, phony fraud of a movie, "Bowling for Columbine." So have plenty of others. Naturally, the idiots in Hollywood chose his "documentary" to receive the Oscar in that same category. And of course he had to open his big fat stupid white mouth... Thankfully, some folks there booed him off the stage.

Want to know just how twisted and wrong he is? From Fox News, Roger Friedman reports this quote from Moore:

"What [the critics] don't get is that I have the will of the people. The No. 1 bestselling book in this country for over 52 weeks is Stupid White People," Moore claimed, referring to his published rant against corporate America. "That's not because they disagree with me, is it?"

Yes, Michael, and Three's Company was the number one show on TV for several years. I guess that makes it the best TV show ever put on the airwaves.

Even James Poniewzik, on Time.com writes:

Shame on You, Mr. Moore! Shame on You! The 'Bowling for Columbine' auteur had every qualification to make his antiwar speech at the Oscars. That didn't make it any less stupid...

Read the whole thing. Anyway, I'm glad I didn't watch the Oscars. Actually, I couldn't have since it wasn't shown on one of the two TV channels I receive here in the bucolic Upper Valley. And since I rarely go to movies anyway unless they're at the drive-in, I could care less about the awards, much less what wealthy Hollywood stars think about world events.

There are plenty of valid reasons to hate Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley and Dave Himrich has a couple of postings on another. Daley wants Chicago to become an "airplane free zone." Dave dispatches with that idea and draws a comparison to banning handguns.

---

And Tim Wilson thought he was going to a simple business meeting and instead was subjected to a right-wing harangue. The speaker at this meeting was supposed to discuss power utilities deregulation. Unfortunately, someone should have "regulated" the speaker...

Diane L. over at Everything Must Go thinks we might be working too hard at preventing civilian deaths and things would go a lot quicker if we weren't. Interesting posting.

...from most of the press, but there have been some large pro-troops, pro-Bush rallies held around the country. From the Washington Times, here's a story about a rally in Richmond, Virginia:

A flag-waving, cheering crowd of about 7,000 gathered to show support for the U.S. military's effort to liberate Iraq and remove Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power.

Supporters dressed in red, white and blue listened to patriotic music and speeches while holding signs that read: "God bless our president," "Support our troops" and "Iraq is French for Hollywood" -- a response to the lack of support from France and screen actors.

"I hope the troops hear about the support that the majority of Americans are giving them," said Kim Marsh, 53, who arrived in a Humvee with a large American flag waving from its side. "We want them all to return."

Organizers said the rally was held to support U.S. service members, not to support the war.

Now that the liberation war is going through tough times, it is more important then ever that we all get the word out to our troops that we are behind them 100 percent.

A reader sends in this comment:

By the way, I have heard about a LOT of pro-war rallies, and actually it is beginning to tick me off. 100,000 people gather to protest this war in New York and the lead is that 91 people got arrested and the Fox 5 news heads say, "I thought they were for peace ..." I know many people who would favor a just war who do not support this one. I know many people who support our troops 100% and want them to come home safe, yet oppose THIS war. But these people are being characterized as hippies because of a media bias and some morons who tape rockets to their crotches and sing songs. Any rally brings idiots, but it is only the idiots who make it on TV.

Meanwhile, a few thousand people gather to support the war effort, and EVERY SINGLE MEDIA OUTLET calls is a rally to "support the troops." Opposing the war does not necessarily mean opposing the troops, and supporting the war does not necessarily mean supporting the troops. Hell, that budget that just passed cuts funding for Veterans hospitals and pensions while we are at war! How's that for supporting the people who fought for our freedom?

I know you live in VT, but down here outside NY it is very frustrating. I am a devoutly patriotic American who flies my flag outside my house and replaces it every six months to ensure it does not get tattered. I am an unpaid elected official in my home town because I believe in the civic participation our country was founded on. My family has fought in every declared war in this country's history from the French and Indian War to WWII and even in undeclared wars like Korea and Vietnam.

To say that any opposition I have to this action means I do not support the troops says that I do not support my veteran father, grandfather, uncle and other ancestors.

This whole debate is becoming too polarized and cartoon-like, with people on both sides lobbing broad-stroked caricatures at each other in an attempt to win an insult war. I'm sick of the people on all sides of this, and hope we do not lose any more of our troops, that this war is over soon, and we can get back to debating the economy and why Bush is not funding any homeland security at a local level.

I discussed this last week. Anyway, in todays Washington Times Jacob Sullum offers his usual insightful commentary on an attempt to legislate by litigation filed by the NAACP. Here's a quote:

In Brooklyn today, jury selection is scheduled to begin in a federal lawsuit blaming gun manufacturers for violent crime. The suit was filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, whose president has called it "an effort to break the backs of those who help perpetuate [the] oversaturation of weapons in our communities."

The NAACP is seeking an injunction that would impose specific restrictions on firearm sales, effectively setting national gun control policy by judicial fiat. It argues that gun" makers have created a "public nuisance" through "negligent marketing" -- "oversupplying" their products even though they know some will end up in the hands of criminals.

Sound familiar? The same basic argument has been used, so far unsuccessfully, by municipalities seeking to get money from the industry and regulate it through the courts.

As I've said, this would be the same as holding Ford liable for carnage by a drunk driver. And accusing them (the gun makers) of "over-supplying" the market is like accusing Miller Beer of "over-supplying" since some of their beer will end up in minors' hands.

Most judges have agreed and the majority of these cases have been dismissed, or at least the components attempting to hold gun makers liable for crimes committed with guns have been dismissed. This time the judge (Jack B. Weinstein) presiding over the case is a well known "anti gun" activist. No doubt that's why the NAACP chose his venue. Sullum is pessimistic about the outcome of the trial. I suspect we will all be following this one closely.

To think about the 2004 presidential elections. For the latest in the Democratic footrace to the primaries, check out Bumper Sticker Primary. Nathan Rudy has all the latest news and polls covered.

Despite what NPR might claim, there are actually 35-40 countries offering varying degrees of support to the coalition to liberate Iraq. But only four countries have gone all the way and sent troops in. Us (as in the U.S.) of course. And our good friends in England. And Australia. And --yes-- Poland. Poland is a small country with a very small military. They have their own struggles but they were able and were willing to contribute two hundred brave soldiers to the cause. Bravo to them! We Americans should find a way to give them thanks. They know what it was like --not too long ago-- to live under oppression. Poland -- you are a proud people with a defiant history and all of us in America give our thanks to you. Just as hell will freeze over before I buy anything from France, so too I will be just as vigilant in striving to find and to buy Polish products. And folks, plenty of good food comes from there.

Our thanks to the great country of Poland. You know how precious freedom is and you have shown that you are willing to risk sacrifice to bring that freedom to others.

There have been anti-war protests all across America. Naturally, like most large metropolitan areas, Fairlee, Vermont featured a protest as well. Nothing wrong with that. I support the liberation of Iraq but I also support the 1st Amendment as vigorously as the 2nd. I just thought it was interesting as to who showed up:

Not surprised, mind you...

Last week someone emailed me to ask "just what is Alphecca about?" Well, it's an occasional blog. I generally post four days a week. I'm a "gay gun nut" so I guess that should indicate the general direction. I post defenses of the Second Amendment and opinions about my stance against gun control. I try to achieve some balance by limiting these to about 50% of all postings, and I prattle on and on about other stuff the other half of the time. But this is a personal weblog and I'll do what I want, when I want to.

For instance, I had every intention of posting a bunch of stuff today about gun control and how much I hate it but frankly, what with the war and all, there are almost no new newpaper articles about the subject. So I'll discuss other things. It's not like I'm being paid or anything...

Just a couple of things. There are some new additions to my blogroll. Yes, thanks to Google I can find out who the kind folks are who provide perma-links to me and -- of course -- I always reciprocate. One is a neat blog called Carl with a K who describes himself as a typical Hollywood Liberal. Needless to say, we probably don't share much of the same politics but that makes it all the more impressive -- on his part -- that he is willing to link to someone he probably disagrees with most of the time. This might be the first time Alphecca appears on the same blogroll with Rittinhouse Review..

We do share a couple things in common -- we're both gay, and we both admire Howard Dean. Anyway, I appreciate his blogrolling me and of course I have returned the favor. So stop by and say hi! Incidentally, he's very cute!

Secondly, I am making one stylistic change to Alphecca. Up till now I have (besides identifying something as a quote) simply indented it. Now, as I have with comments, I will also show it in the "typewriter type" font. This should make it clearer as to what is and isn't a quote. A small thing but then I'm a small guy...

So all quotes will now look like this...