Regarding my post from this morning about facing death, I just thought of something you should really read. It's not on the web. Go to your local library and borrow a copy of the great Doris Lessing Reader, a collection of her short stories. Now read A Sunrise on the Veld. It is an astonishing coming-of-age story about a boy who suddenly realizes that life can be snatched away at any moment.

Folks, I read about 300 books a year, plus countless stories from "the pulps." This is still, after all these years, one of the few short stories I can re-read and then have to just sit and reflect on afterwards. The pen will always be mightier than the sword. At least from much better writers than me.

So I guess this brings another edition of Alphecca to a close. It's been an interesting week and I hope you liked at least some of my commentary. As usual, I take weekends off to "re-charge" and so I'll be back on Monday. Have a great weekend everyone and I'll see you soon. Thanks for stopping by!

Walter Olsen at OverLawyered has more commentary on the 9/11 lawsuits that make a mockery of that tragedy. *Sigh.* I mentioned this a few posts ago but I'm too lazy to link to it. Besides, I know you all read everything I write here... Yeah, sure. Anyway, Walter links to Gregg Easterbrook's TNR post which is damn near perfect in summing up the problem of 9/11 victim lawsuits.

These sick-bastard lawsuits result from the defective proposition that the Port Authority (N.Y. World Trade Center owners) didn't prevent people on the ground from being injured when the World Trade Centers collapsed. The airlines -- who have screened against guns and stuff, somehow didn't prevent some fucking Islamic mutants from using box-cutters to hi-jack the planes flown into the WTC's. Folks, how can you possibly anticipate every conceivable terroristic act and (without incurring the ACLU's wrath) deploy preventative measures that would somehow prevent every possible scenario that these bastards can "cook up?"

You can't. Because if you did -- as some misguided folks in our federal government are trying to do -- you would violate every right and freedom enjoyed by and promised to America's citizens by our precious Constitution and our very precious Bill of Rights.

Do we really want to live the way the subjects in Iran or North Korea live?

But according to these damned-greedy trial lawyers, and a sick judge, this is how we must live or else we must face the "civil penalty" judgements of greedy victims. Here's a quote from Gregg's great piece:

Crashes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field near Shanksville, Pa., "may not have been foreseen," U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein wrote, but the airlines had a duty to protect their passengers, crew and victims on the ground by better screening passengers. "The ... defendants controlled who came onto the planes and what was carried aboard," Hellerstein wrote. "They had the obligation to take reasonable care in screening."

But what is reasonable care? How much pre-flight security would Americans actually tolerate? How many of them would sue for intrusive searches and delays caused by those searches?

It seems to me that these companies are caught-up in a "Catch-22." They're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't. Sort of like Ford Motor Company being simultaneously sued a few years ago because one victim of a car-crash sued because his Escort didn't have an air-bag and another plaintiff suing because they were injured by an air-bag. It's a no-win situation in our civil courts these days. By the way, Ford lost both cases.

We could all live our lives in comfy padded-cells, allowed no visits or freedoms or contact with the outside world. Is this really what America is about? Should we in the United States concede defeat and surrender to an all powerful, controlling government?

If you buy into the logic of these sick-ass lawsuits then, yes -- we should somehow be held responsible. Or else, someone has to be held responsible and has to pay out lottery money when something goes wrong.

I suspect that most of my regular readers probably agree with me so far. Now here's where even they may part company with me...

Remember the [Warning: Jeff going into cursing, rant mode...] stupid old bitch who bought coffee (no doubt wanting coffee that was hot) and then proceeded to open the container in a moving car and spilled it on her legs and won a pile of money for that stupidity?

See, I think that when a company loses a civil-suit like this -- let's say for one million dollars -- they should be entitled to inflict a true one million dollars worth of suffering on the alleged victim who won the suit.

McDonald's should have said, "Okay, you won a ton of money and now we're going to hurt you for that sum of money. Because all of these lawsuits are bullshit. ALL OF THEM. No? Then help pass legislation that weeds out the bogus ones. McDonald's should have been entitled to pour scalding hot water onto this stupid woman's legs. To make the crime fit the punishment. A reversal of words that brings it all into prospective.

Now here's where a whole lot of you will get pissed-off at me. A spouse lost her husband in the WTC tragedy. Now she wants to blame and sue the Port Authority of NY. Well, if she wins... then I know our justice system is totally out-of-control but further more, I have to admit that since she has managed to put a dollar-amount on her lost-loved-one and somehow blamed a company (even a government agency company) then she should suffer as much as she is asking for. Hey! You want to get rich off of your loved-one's death?

[Here it comes, folks]

Then I'm glad you lawsuit-happy victims suffered. I hope you bastard-greedy lawyer-coached victims were miserable and desolate. Okay, not really. But what you are doing is so wrong. Because you are trying to extort money from an entity or company that could not possibly have forseen or prevented the events that took place on that terrible day of 9/11/01 but you don't seem to care. All you know and seemingly want to play is the sick "blame-game" and you want to make money off of it. That's my opinion.

Who are people going to blame and sue when a meteorite eventually strikes the Earth? This is a perfect analogy because the defendants in these lawsuits -- these companies -- did take reasonable precautions but you know what? It wasn't enough BUT could we stand a little honesty here, NOTHING would have been enough. The terrorists would have and did find a way to strike at us. To blame the Port Authority or the airline companies for the actions of some sick-fucking-Islamic-mutants is unfair and ridiculous. It is wrong and shameful. These companies are not evil or negligent. They did what any reasonable company would have done. If they had done more, the unions and ACLU would have had them in the courts for that.

This is all so "NO WIN" and no politician really wants to address this injustice. The lawyers donate too much money to them. And we the citizens continue to lose our rights and freedoms because of it. Because we now live in a lawsuit preventative society where we all practice defensive living. How sad and pathetic. We've been reduced to defending everything we say and do because greedy trial-lawyers have destroyed our economy, our way of life, our system of justice and our autonomy.

Damn it!

---

Update 9/13 AM comments:

Great article on those lawsuits. You did get a little rant-y with the thing about McDonalds getting to do a million dollars worth of damage. The problem with that is that the jury already *thought* they'd done that much damage to her. Emotional anguish and all. (*blech*)

One of my favorite children's books is "Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day". It should be in every kindergarten. In it, Alexander has a bad day. Every page something else bad happens. He wants to run away. He hopes it will get better. People accustomed to Hollywood endings expect him to get a pony or something at the end of the book to redeem the day. But nothing. The last page is bedtime. Mom kisses him goodnight, agrees with him that it was a bad day, and tells him bad days happen. Hopefully tomorrow will be better.

That's it. But it's something that so many Victims in this country forget. EVERYONE has a tragedy. Suffering is universal. Bad shit happens. Life isn't fair.

Suck it up.

The only 9/11 lawsuit I approve of is the one naming the Saudi government and using the subpoena powers to get information about funding. That's using the legal system to fight back appropriately.
--Shell from Across The Atlantic.

And:

Nope, you're not gonna get me to disagree with you about lawsuits! Er, that is, not with your underlying meaning (assuming your bit about dumping more boiling water is just hyperbole--isn't it?) And the solution isn't that hard, because most of the parts actually exist in various places around the Anglosphere, so we can see how they're working:

1. Little or no provision for punitive damages. Some states already do this, including my own (Washington.) You want damages that recompense you for your loss? Fine, file a civil case and prove it! You want _punitive_ damages? Sorry, gotta convince a prosecutor or grand jury to get the state involved.

Works pretty well, as far as I can see--we certainly don't get jackpot-style awards here like they have in Mississipi et al.

2. Loser pays. This is the rule in England, and it's a brilliant means of reducing the incidence of frivolous lawsuits. Who's going to take your laughable case if there's a strong risk you are going to go bankrupt if you lose, leaving nothing to pay the attorney?

3. Caps on pain-and-suffering and other intangibles. Umm, to be perfectly honest, while I know this has been proposed in some places, I don't know where it might actually be in force today. But the value of the cap is clear: whereas we do want to recognize some value to these intangibles, we really need something to keep the awards within reason.

--Kirk P.

From Bad State of Gruntledness comes this powerful remembrance.

---

James at Hell in a Handbasket has two posts you really should read. Firstly, a story about the ROTC at his college. About how good they are inspite of the obstacles they face from other students who would protest or harm them simply because they want to serve and protect this great country.

Secondly, the problem of women in abusive relationships that refuse to sign a complaint. How can you help those who won't help themselves?

---

Lastly, the Hawkin's Blog seems to have removed me from their blogroll. Hmmmm....

Don Watkins thinks the new Whoopi Goldberg show is a Fawlty Towers rip-off. I point this out because there have been several attempts to produce an "American" Fawlty that I can't hold that against her.

I watched the show last night and I have to say it's pretty funny. Really funny. Great cast of nut-case characters, and Whoopi is (as usual) marvelous. This will be a big hit. And it's about time NBC came up with something original in their drab line-up.

---

Craig at Lead and Gold doesn't like the new trend of metrosexuals in advertising and media. There is great truth to what Craig says. When is the last time (outside of a beer commercial) where the hard-working, "middle-america" man (not the liberal, coastal-elite type) was portrayed in a flattering light -- as someone women want?

Come to think of it, when's the last time you saw people who really work for a living -- say farmers or commercial fishermen -- portrayed at all? The last time you even saw a farmer on TV was Green Acres! And that show piled every stereotypical insult onto them and rural life in general.

---

Matt at It Could Be Better has a new job as opinion editor of his college paper. AND he want's to take his blog back to the top!

---

Swen at A Coyote at the Dog Show is fisking Richard Cohen. There's chads on the floor, or is that blood? So how do you really feel, Swen?

First actor Charles Bronson. Now, actor John Ritter and the great singer Johnny Cash have passed away.

The one that affects me the most is John Ritter, not because I thought he was a brilliant actor or had a reputation for being an all-around nice guy, but because he was only 54-years-old. Only a few years older than me.

And I just learned that someone (a year younger than me) whom I went to school with suddenly died of a heart-attack. And it reminds me that I'm no longer an indestructible kid. It serves as a warning that the majority of my time on Earth is behind me and I'd better enjoy and make use of what remains.

I'm not suicidal. Indeed, even when things seemed bleak in my life I never considered that option. (Although an argument could be made that my smoking habit is a slow form of suicide...)

But I've always felt like, yes, things could go wrong with my body and I could die at any moment. As strange as this sounds, I've always felt that having pets -- in my case cats -- plants a subliminal suggestion in my mind that I have to stay alive if for no other reason than to be there for them.

Yes -yes, pets have been shown to make people live several years longer than non-pet owners because of their devotion and calming effect on us. But I also think there is some protective mechanism in our sub-conscious minds that causes our brain to make the necessary repairs and such or heal what needs to be healed so that our pets don't wind up orphans at the mercy of "the estate." Possibly even more so than our children because (at least if they're adults) they are capable of fending for themselves.

Another thing that has given my life meaning is Alphecca -- this blog. I've done a lot of things in my life, some good, some bad, made a lot of stupid decisions along the way. But I've accomplished nothing to be remembered for until, I hope, now. By blogging, I create a permanent record of my thoughts and life -- to live on in all eternity (at least, some of it) in the archives of Google and company and in the memories of my kind readers.

I'll never have children and grand-children to mourn my passing... But there is always Alphecca. I'll never be known as a great writer but I hope I will be remembered as an okay writer who tried to keep things interesting enough that folks would return for a second and third look. My own desperate grasp at immortality.

And then there were five... Five states left that don't allow their citizens to protect themselves in accordance with our nation's Bill of Rights.

From the AP:

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - Lawmakers on Thursday granted most Missourians the right to carry concealed guns, overriding Gov. Bob Holden's veto and reversing the outcome of a statewide election four years ago.

Republican state Sen. Jon Dolan, an Army public affairs officer, cast the deciding vote Thursday after being granted a last-minute request for military leave from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The Senate's 23-10 vote to override the veto just barely met the required two-thirds majority. The House voted 115-43 Wednesday to override the Democratic governor's veto.

Now, it's not a great bill in that it comes with a lot of restrictions such as a minimum age requirement of having to be 23-years-old. There are also required safety and marksmanship classes.

Most importantly, Missourians have to apply to their county sheriffs. I don't know the details of this but if these sheriffs are allowed discretion, that could be bad news since they might only grant permits to friends and cronies and not to folks they might not approve of (blacks, gays, women...) Can someone in Missouri enlighten me on the specifics?

Still, it's a step forward and even a "baby step" is something to be pleased about.

I can't speak for all the networks on TV since I only receive two (and one of those is -- *yuch* -- PBS) but The Today Show on NBC has dedicated the entire show to "America Remembers" so at least one show is demonstrating responsibility in covering this grim anniversary.

Just as everyone else does, I remember that day well. I was driving to work and the country music station I was listening to had a brief mention that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center -- more to follow -- and then went back to playing music. I was thinking, how odd; did some "Piper Cub" lose it's bearings? By the time I reached the store, the station had switched to the CBS radio network and the ghastly implications were becoming apparent.

I rushed into the store (I was working alone that day) and turned on the radio and continued to listen. There's no TV in the store and the internet was jammed or down so all I had was the radio. The second plane crashed into the other tower and it was now clear that this was a terrible act of terrorism.

Hanover, N.H. became a ghost-town (Dartmouth College wasn't back in session yet) and so I sat there alone, listening to the unfolding news. Every so often my boss would call to report what she was seeing on TV. Only one woman came into the store that day, sat in the front of the showroom for a few hours listening to the radio in shocked silence.

A brutal day for America and a terrible reminder that we are vulnerable to all the twisted mutants of this world. And the fact is that no matter how many precautions or regulations we enact, they will still find a way. All it took was a truck filled with fertilizer to knock down the federal building in Oklahoma City. How do you guard against that? I'm very disappointed that a judge is allowing the lawsuits to proceed against the airlines and Port Authority.

And since you can't protect against or prevent every possible scenario, I have to say that I am against many of the measures this country has taken since then, especially the ones that erode our basic freedoms and liberties -- the very rights and reasons they hate us so much for.

The reality is that they can wound us but they will never bring us down. Ever. It just makes us stronger as a nation. And yes, unlike some mentally weak liberals and leftists in this country, it does come down to US versus THEM. *Sigh.*

Want to know what a pro-gun lobbiest has to go through? A brand new blog, Capital Truth by Jim March, California Field Representative, Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (website: CCRKBA.org.) A pro-gun lobbiest assigned to California? Yipes. Anyway, it should be an interesting blog to follow.

---

And don't forget the new:

(The picture is the link.) Newly formatted front page index for easier navigation!

So this weekly check on the bias at the Yahoo Gun Debate Page tracks the bias of the various editorials and stories they (Yahoo) chooses to link to. Simple enough and so far it's been a pretty steady gig. Until now! As I write this at about 11:15 on Tuesday evening, there is not one new link -- story -- listed on the page. Fortunately, this weekly thing has been growing and become almost -- sort of a magazine. I draw on and report from many sources.

In a literal sense, there was no bias this week since they didn't link to anything. The reality is that there are plenty of stories and editorials out there being ignored.

But first, a pretty picture from Armchair Gunshow.com

Here's the description of this listing:

Flintlock - saddle ring carbine - .67 cal. - 14.5" barrel - Good condition. - Touch hole bushed, possible reconversion. Salt & pepper gray metal w/ some light pitting on lockplate, pan & cock. Partial markings on barrel breech include 852, crown G(?), EE or JJ (?); tang marked 27, 2E. - Working. - Stock cracked diagonally forward of lock. - antq - item # MF-FL-7093 - $950

Isn't that a beauty? You can find plenty more like that at the Armchair Gunshow.com so check them out.

Onto business! Will Missouri ever allow concealed carry? It's close. From St. Louis Today:

Although lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a concealed weapons bill during the regular legislative session, it appears supporters do not have enough votes to override Gov. Bob Holden's veto of the controversial measure.

"It seems to me that we are a vote short," said Kevin Jamison, president of the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance and a proponent of the measure.

"It's very close," said Jeanne Kirkton, who is with the Million Mom March and the League of Women Voters of Missouri. She opposes the concealed weapons bill.

The outcome of a veto override attempt depends on what happens in the state Senate, where two St. Louis area lawmakers will play important roles in the bill's fate. The pressure is on state Sen. Mike Gibbons, R-Kirkwood, to change his "no" vote and favor the conceal-carry bill. At the same time, it's questionable whether Sen. Jon Dolan, R-Lake Saint Louis, a "yes" vote for concealed weapons, can leave active military duty and attend this week's session when lawmakers review all the bills that Holden rejected.

It was only about 16 years ago that only eight states allowed concealed carry. Today there are 35 states allowing citizens the right to protect themselves. This is a fair and balanced article and I only mention it here to encourage my readers in Missouri to write, email, fax, and call Gibbons and Dolan to try to get this bill finally passed. Don't sit back and hope others will do it. Look, it means nothing to a politician to receive encouragement from a "non-resident" such as myself. It HAS to come from you! A voter. And quick!

Something similar is happening in Wisconsin. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Advocates of Wisconsin's legislation to allow concealed carry, which comes up for a public hearing in the Capitol on Tuesday, say it will make citizens safer by deterring criminals who would otherwise assume law-abiding citizens are likely prey because they are unarmed.

But opponents insist the current law has not been proven to be faulty and that putting more weapons on Wisconsin streets will imperil public safety.

State Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) and Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire) are the main authors of a measure that would allow Wisconsin residents who are 21 or older, who have completed a 22-hour firearms training course, who are not incompetent and who are not drug dependent to carry concealed weapons. Anyone carrying a weapon would have to obtain a $75 permit from a county sheriff's department.

The bill also bars issuing permits to felons, people who have committed violent misdemeanors and others who are ineligible to possess firearms under federal law. The state Department of Justice estimates that 30,000 people would apply for a permit in the first year, based on experiences in other states.

"It's something that's a right that was taken away 130 years ago, and we need to give that right back," Gunderson, a sports shop owner, said.

The legislation was prodded along by a state Supreme Court ruling in a Milwaukee case this summer that said the state constitution affords homeowners and business people the right to carry concealed weapons on their own property for a lawful purpose.

The article mentions that most cops in the state are against the measure. That's too bad since an armed, law abiding populace can be the policeman's best friend. *Sigh.*

---

As long as I'm reporting on bias against guns in the media, it would be interesting to look at some of the rhetoric hurled about on the Yahoo Gun Control Debate Message Board. These are actual messages posted there:

>Once again, ye dimwit, thats for me to know and ye to find out!!!<

Sounds like "Im not tellllling yoooouuuu!!!" How "adult" of you there clown boy!!!

Face it. There isn't CRAP you can or will do about anything because you have no authority to do so. In fact, I'm being "foolish" with my gun right now just to taunt you!!! What are you going to do sissy boy!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA You ain't gonna do SHIT!!!

>I am perciving ye as a 4 year old girl....LOL!!! <

So if you perceive me as a 4 year old what does that say about you. I had to teach you about how light disperses in the atmosphere instead of "shadows from the earth" making the sky blue!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Bested by what you perceive to be a 4 year old. How pathetic are you!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

And here's another:

<<[laws are not rights....and in this case, its an infringment to the federal 2nd.....the one ye dumbnuts hailing like was it untouchable!!!]>>>



LOL...But practical, ye dumbnut!!

<>

Got news for ye, limpdikk, thats pretty much what I have been saying too, just using other words....and what the state is doing MIGHT have an impact on the federal one, AS IT HAS IN THIS CASE!!!

Now, you're all shaking your heads and saying, "Jeff, what the heck are you quoting that nonsense for?"

There's a method to my madness. And these chat/message threads/forums are media too! Now, aside from providing a perfect reason why the big time bloggers such as Glenn and Rachel and the Volokhs as well as minor players such as myself don't have comment functions, these excerpts show that pro-gun enthusiasts (and these two quoted posts are from pro-2A'ers) can act just as juvenile and post silly stuff guaranteed to turn off or away anyone sitting on the fence about the 2nd Amendment issue.

I guess what I'm struggling to point out here is that we, as supporters of the original meaning -- unadulterated intention -- of the Second Amendment have a responsibility to ignore taunts from the liberal (i.e. anti-gun) factions and if we do respond, we must do so with a cool head, with logic, with facts, and with responsibility.

If someone says, "guns suck, bla, bla, bla" then we must put aside our anger and try to make our case -- not just to the person who posted what we disagree with, but with the invisible -- silent and maybe undecided -- audience also reading everything in that thread.

So my advice is to be careful how you reply to any disagreeable post -- be the adult and just address the facts. Logic will win in the end and we have logic and facts on our side. Don't rise to the bait! Or to mangle this metaphor even more, don't sink to their level...

---

Since this is a magazine... another picture, this one a poster from most everyone's favorite, Colt:

I'm counting on Colt Manufacturing Company to have some remaining shred of feelings towards their enthusiasts and not come down on me for reproducing this poster here.

---

So what are some other gun-bloggers (the new media) up to?

Funny you should ask...

A bunch of us Pro-Second Amendment bloggers have gotten together to form a sort of "co-op" blog. The purpose is not to discuss the politics of guns -- just to discuss GUNS. Designed to feature articles covering everything from buying your first gun to maintaining it to gun safety and then onto more advanced articles about shooting, hunting, and all other aspects of the sport of firearms... Ladies and Gentlemen -- I present to you the:

The Shooter's Carnival (nicknamed "the Carnival of the Shooters) is a serious attempt to bring as much information as possible into one spot in the blogosphere about gun ownership, the responsibilities that go with that, and most importantly, the fun and enjoyment that derives from it. Archives are divided into categories such as beginner, intermediate, advanced, safety, maintenance, legal issues, etc.

The founders include:

Boone Country, Hell in a Handbasket, Lay Lines, Publicola, SayUncle, The Smallest Minority, Stop the Bleating, ...and yours truly...me!

Submissions are welcome and instructions on "how to" are on the blog. It's just starting up so check it out. There is much more to come there so stay tuned and make sure you bookmark or blogroll it!

---

So that concludes this edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias. Here's to hoping Yahoo finds something -- anything -- to link to by next week. I'd also like suggestions (with pictures and a write-up) for some nice antique guns to feature in the usually weekly chart. And any links to stories you folks are finding out there should be emailed to me so I can add my blather to them... My goal is to turn this weekly feature into a magazine of reports on bias, but also features about guns, even humor, fun gun shows, or anything else you would like spread around. See you soon. Thanks for stopping by!

---

Update 9/11 AM comment received:

[regarding the Yahoo message group]

Sorry Jeff, you only got it half right.

The first quote is a reply from a pro gunner to "odins force" his words are between the carets. 'odins' has appeared under several different names and is an admitted Swedish group that intends to close the debate.

The second quote is pure Ralpo (anti gun, 'csgl' Common Sense Gun Laws), (odins force) and was in a thread with me.

I am the one offering ralpo, "wellness is yer salvation ye know desires the key ye see." If you read my replies to ralpo you will see that I rarely resort to name calling, though I slip occasionally, sorry. I don't engage ralpo in substantive debate b/c he doesn't understand the difference between the 2nd and state rights. He may be deliberately obtuse.

I enjoy your bias report, and thank you for that.

--Tommygun (tg)

Ahhhh...Bach! Thanks! My eyes kind of glaze over trying to follow what's going on in these message groups.

It's bad enough that some lawyers and social-engineering groups want to control everything we eat by suing fast-food and snack-food makers. Now they're after our obese pets. An estimated 25% of all cats and dogs are overweight. From the AP:

Kathryn Michel, a veterinary nutritionist at the University of Pennsylvania, said she has noted more overweight pets in recent years, particularly cats, and the problem seems to occur at younger ages than in the past.

"A big problem that people don't always recognize," she said, is that pets "are members of our families, we show them affection, and one way is by sharing food and giving treats."

People don't have to ignore those hopeful eyes looking up, she says, just be careful. A piece of a biscuit will help bond with the animal just as much as the whole biscuit.

Hey Kathryn -- in your hat! As my cats' vet says, "so they live a year or two less. Let them enjoy life."

Actually, that's how I rule my own life... Seriously, I love spoiling my cats and yes, Sambo is a bit overweight but I will do everything I can to indulge their every whim. I am their God and I treat them as I wish He would treat me...

How much you wanna bet some lawyers will now be filing class-action (or is that cat-action) suits against pet owners for over feeding their dogs and cats? Or suing Purina or some other such nonsense such as allowing states to legislate our pet's weight and charging us with abuse if we feed them too much?

---

I will be back tomorrow (Wednesday) morning with the Weekly gun story bias thing as well as the announcement of a brand new co-op blog just for gun enthusiasts (beginner and advanced.) So look for that. In the meantime, thanks for stopping by!

Arthur Silber on the "gay school" in New York City.


By the way, it's Arthur's one-year blogoversary! Congratulations Arthur! Keep up the great writing and thinking.

...is this post by Jay Solo asking you where you'd go back in time to, and what would you bring with you. I'm not sure where I'd go but you can bet I'd bring a handgun and plenty of ammo with me...

On the way home from Massachusetts last night I stopped off at Kentucky Fried Chicken in West Lebanon. The first time I've eaten there in about 15 years. The chicken was fine as were the bisquits. But those mashed potatoes. They tasted all right but they are way too ...uh... mashed. Too smooth. They have the texture of Johnson's Baby Powder. Real mashed potatoes need lumps and things. The gravy was good though.

I know, another riviting post by Jeff...

Yeah, I knock liberals around here at Alphcca. But when the occasion merits it, I have no problem slamming a conservative as well. This week, Republicans sounded like total fools (not for the first time) by labeling simple campaign rhetoric as "hate speech."

Now, no one will ever accuse the Washington Times of fostering bi-partisanship but this article was just too silly. Here's a quote:

The rhetoric of Democratic presidential hopefuls has sunk to a "new low" of "political hate speech" that will be rejected by voters, the chairman of the Republican Party said yesterday.

"I think history will show that this field has taken presidential discourse to a new low," Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"The kind of words we're hearing now from the Democratic candidates go beyond political debate -- this is political hate speech," he said.

Let me see if I can put this into simple, easy to understand words: Ed Gillespie is a total idiot who should be fired from his position as quickly as possible. He makes [DNC chairman] Terry McAuliffe sound like a Rhode's Scholar and that's damn near impossible. As usual, Gillespie is wrong and here are some of the "quotes" he claims are "hate speech":

Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri called Mr. Bush "a miserable failure," and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean said the war in Iraq has increased the likelihood of more terrorist attacks.

"The truth is, there are more likely to be more people from al Qaeda bombing Iraqis and Americans today than there were before Saddam Hussein was kicked out," Mr. Dean said.

Asked yesterday on CNN's "Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer" if the "miserable failure" statement is intended to be a campaign theme, Mr. Gephardt responded that "it is what it is."

Wow! That really is vile and "hateful!" By Golly, you'd think that more horrible words had never been uttered during a political campaign. I don't know what sort of "boy in a bubble" life asshat Ed Gillespie (RNC spokesman) has led but if he qualifies these mild statements of disagreement from the Democratic challengers to President Bush as "hate speech" then he really needs to take a first-year course in American History and another in American Politics.

Earth to Ed! Here's a few examples of political campaigning that you apparently missed because you're a totally un-educated fool:

From Rachel & Andrew Jackson:

Mudslinging Reached New Heights
But even among a long history of dirty campaigning, the Campaign of 1828 stood out as the worst. Attacks on Jackson were unparalleled in American political history. His opponents accused him of murder, gambling, slave trading and treason. They called him a 'military chieftain,' and said his mother was a prostitute, his father a mulatto man, and his wife a bigamist. "Mrs. Jackson once found her husband in tears pointing to a paragraph reflecting on his mother and said, 'Myself I can defend; you I can defend; but now they have assailed even the memory of my mother."

From Dan Sanders' great site on political campaigns that you all should read:

One of the most fondly held delusions of modern presidential politics is that campaigns get dirtier with every election. Pundits and the public snarl at the deluge of "attack ads" flying between one side and another; a ravenous press gleefully lays bare the private lives of public men; the ill-will demeans the office and wears out the citizenry months before the November denouement. In every campaign, someone brings up the noble politics of the last century. Oh for the days of Lincoln and Douglas, they will moan, for the days of great men debating the great issues with dignity and eloquence.

To remember ancient campaigns only in these terms is, to say the very least, myopic. Dirty campaigning has been a fact of life in presidential politics if not from Day On--when George Washington ran all but unopposed‹then certainly by Day Two or Three. The instant Washington retired to Mount Vernon, the fight to succeed him, between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, was on. Manners were quickly forgotten, as was much of the truth. Adams's forces derided Jefferson as an atheist, a pawn of the French eager to join their guillotine-mad Revolution, a coward for his lack of military service during America's Revolution, and a candidate for "cut-throats who walk in rags and sleep amidst filth and vermin." Jefferson supporters gave as good as they got, claiming that the haughty Adams planned to tear up the Constitution and install himself as the King of America with his sons ensconced as crown princes. When the two met in a rematch four years later it got even worse. It was alleged that President Adams had ordered an American warship to journey to England and return with not one but two mistresses for him to enjoy. On top of his supposed sins from the last election, Jefferson was now‹according to newspapers backed by Adams's party‹a godless, lawless racketeer in favor of legal prostitution, incest, rape, marital infidelity, and the slaughter of children on spears. When Jefferson won, the hard feelings were so deep that Adams refused to be part of the swearing-in ceremony, slipping out of town before dawn on Inauguration Day.

Want more examples? From the Impeachment of Andrew Johnson comes this 1865 cartoon and read the fine-print in it.

Folks, dirty campaigning is nothing new and we've lived with it all of our lives. To suggest that somehow the current political presidential race is somehow worse indicates on the part of the speaker that he has no clue to our history. That means he knows nothing of which he speaks about. He brings shame on the Republican Party and it's (grantedly vague) agenda.

What is it about most Americans that they don't know the basic facts about our great but sometimes contentious history? And why do politicians and their "shills" distort and flat-out lie about our country's great history? Contentious? Yes. Loud and bawdy? You bet. That's what makes America the most fascinating, wonderful history and actual entity our world has ever met.

So all through history America's political campaigns have been loud and abnoxious and slanderous. But think! That's what makes our great country so special. In no other country in this world can you have so much open talk and debate and discussion and out-and-out mud being slung around. No other country! Is it all loud and noisy? Yup. Is it a sign that politics in America is well and healthy? I think so.

But to call this all "hate speech" is simply stupid, political spin, and noxious to all that we hold dear here in America.

For all the political ads on TV and noise from the opposition, I wouldn't trade my country's political discourse for anyone, anywhere else in the world. At least we are allowed to vent and say our "opinion." Try that in Iran or North Korea or these days, in England.

The statements by the various Democratic candidates were totally in control, not inflammatory, and perfectly reasonable as discourse. I might not agree with them but they said nothing that shouldn't be allowed. The Republican reaction was a discrace and Gillsespie is totally responsible for that press-release response and as such should be fired immediately from his job.

Each Monday I try to give a mention to some new (to me!) blogs, unusual blogs, all of which I find interesting but that might be obscure to you.

Firstly, a couple things... I've moved the RPG blog Battle Royale to my "good friends" reciprocal blogroll. They don't have a blogroll themselves but they've been kind enough to keep their mention of Alphecca "front and center" for quite a few weeks now so they go into my "A" list. I no longer have the time to participate (myself) in on-line games but if you do you might want to check them out. Once upon a time I was quite active over at Battle.Net (part of Blizzard Games) participating in the on-line versions of, mostly, StarCraft. Anyway, Battle Royale is a more cerebral and text, more RPG (Role Playing Game) type setup you folks might want to check out.

Most of the folks I mention each week never acknowledge such, including my email to them, much less adding me to their blogroll. A few that have are Live From the Guillotine and Indigo Insights and A Frustrated Artist.

By the way, if there are any gazillionaires out there who would like to buy me a gift, please visit A Frustrated Artist, especially here and here. Either (or both!) would look wonderful on my wall. There is no reason in the world why Ann should feel frustrated. Start buying her stuff for yourself. You'll get fine art and support a struggling artist.

I know that some readers will be mystified that Alphecca (in otherwords, me, Jeff Soyer,) the mostly conservative gay gun-nut should like art but if you do a search on my name (Soyer) you'll discover that I come from a family of artists and musicians. I'm the black-sheep of the family, with no talent other than with words (and many would dispute that as well.)

Secondly, I'd like to dedicate this week to several bloggers who've recently added me to their blogrolls. Some you know, some -- maybe not.

Pervasive Light is a handsome pro-2A blogger who has kindly mentioned me a few times but now has a real blogroll. He has a good mix of subjects on his blog so check him out. And he has spiffy "+2A" hats for sale!

The Kolkata Libertarian is another pro-2A blogger who most of you are, I'm sure, aware of. He's much bigger than me and a much better writer. He and I are absolutely in "lock-step" about guns.

The Enigmatic Musings of a Cynical Mind ranges far and wide and I'm thankful he thinks Alphecca is worth linking to. Give him your support, folks.

Les Jones has switched to a spiffy new MT template. A very good blogger deserving your bookmark.

Jennifer's History links to me as part of the "Axis of Naughty" for supporting my blogfather Glenn Reynolds in the great war. I know, you're shocked, shocked! that I would side with Instapundit when I was the one who actually started this whole thing although no one would ever give the Vermont fag who likes guns a speck of credit for the ideas or impetus for having fun like this. I'm being facetious here...

And now onto some new blogs...

Mike's Garden Muse is from England and records the work of a landscape architect. Here's some of his work and I know you're all wondering why I would care. Simple (for those who read me all the time) because I was a "fencer" for ten years and worked with many landscape architects and I appreciate these folks who can turn a mound of dirt into a garden or other space of beauty. And it might just give you some ideas. Look, the only thing we subjects have control over is our own owned (as long as we pay our outrageous taxes) space in our yard. Why NOT turn it into something beautiful? Mike will show you how.

Okay well... Pussy Ranch is for some tastes. I just like her writing style. And I did promise a variety!

And along those same lines... Information Leafblower is a tennis freak with great pics you WON'T see anywhere else. Like Tennis? Kyle has much more than that so visit him as well. Somehow, I don't think he will ever blogroll me but as I said months ago, that isn't a criteria for these listings.

And finally, anyone who appreciates (and mentions) the great sci-fi writers Philip K. Dick and Chip Delany, such as Wisdom Teeth Says deserves a mention here as well. And he has a lot more to say about many other things as well.

So that's the Monday mentions. Please visit these fine folks.