So I guess this brings to an end yet another week here at Alphecca. Thanks to all who write in or link or visit. I'm going through a tough time so any donations are really appreciated. I'll try to be more up-beat next week and of course I'll return on Monday with my "Weekly Report."

I hope all of you kind visitors also check out the great folks in my blogroll on the left sidebar; they really are much better at this than I am and each of them have interesting stories and perspectives worth reading. I love them, I love their posts (there just isn't time for me to mention them all each week) and I value their links to my humble, nearly incoherent blog.

Especially, I want to again thank all of you for stopping by. It's amazing that for $11 bucks a month for the website on Hosting Matters and $20 bucks a month for an ISP, I can fill the web-waves with my blather. And some of you are nice enough to stop by and actually read it. I wish I was a better writer -- and that my moods didn't effect my writings so much. Anyway, thanks for your visits. Have a great weekend and for those in "my neck of the woods," it looks like Sunday/Monday we're getting slammed with another storm.

The cool thing is that I'm off Monday and Tuesday and (aside from being able to blog a lot) I can lounge by the window watching everyone else struggle to get to work while I sit around watching the Today Show and sipping vodka... I'm so decadent!

I haven't been very posty this week -- I've been sick early on and then depressed and feeling sorry for myself. But just because I've been in a funk doesn't mean other bloggers have. So here's some good reading for the weekend (which as you know, I take off):

This morning I mentioned a John R. Lott op-ed in NRO, and hot on the heals of that one, he has another in Investor's Business Daily putting the deaths in Baghdad in perspective by comparing them to the current murder rate in Washington, D.C. (a subject I've written extensively about.) He cleverly ties it in with the extreme gun control practiced in DC. Check it out!

---

My blogson Eric Scheie has a bunch of good posts up so just go there and start scrolling.

---

My buddy Greg at the Hobbesian Conservative has a post entitled, "Hatemail is on the Way" defending Jonah Goldberg re: the Supreme Court decision on campaign finance.. The link isn't working right now so just scroll down -- better yet, read all as you scroll down since Greg is a very good blogger.

---

My friend Say Uncle expresses much better than I do the problem with libertarianism. Well worth reading and please discuss it on his comments section. He repeats something I've said before, that 10% of any group ruins it for the other 90% and that also spoils it for folks who dream of a libertarian (small "l") society.

---

In a much different vein (*slurp*) my girlfriend of Live From the Guillotine was re-arranging her livingroom when her kids started asking what boys want... So who is this Viagra? Heh!

---

I'm trying to cruise around and a bunch of blogs on Bug*Splat are not currently coming up. *Sigh*

---

You know, Mike Silverman is SO on the money with these two posts here and here.

---

Can I just say that over at one of my favorite blogs, Across the Atlantic, Shell finds the most demented stuff? God bless her!

Dave Kopel has a good review of Police Chief Moose's book in yesterday's National Review Online. For those with short memories, Moose was at the center of the investigation into the Washington Snipers last year. He quit his post in order to make lots of money with this book. Kopel says there's a lot missing from the book. I haven't read it and have no comment. Anyway, check it out. Dave is always on target.

---

Also from NRO, John R. Lott, Jr. has an article telling all the whiny Democrats to finally get over Florida 2000 already. I couldn't agree more.

I've been reporting here about the KS town of Geuda Springs. Last month the town council passed a resolution requiring every head of household to own a gun and ammunition. The town attorney wanted to research the legal questions the ordinance opened up. That won't be necessary now. Here's a quote from the Winfield Courier:

Mayor Ed Lacey has vetoed a resolution that ordered a redrafting of the ordinance and a resolution calling for a straw poll to gauge public opinion on the issue, a spokesperson at Geuda Springs¹ city hall said this morning.

³All (the mayor) has to do is write down on a piece of paper that he wants to veto a resolution and turn it in at city hall,² city clerk Peggy Terry said. ³He can do that at any time and he has already done it² with the gun ordinance.

Geuda Springs city attorney Tom Herlocker said this morning he spoke with Lacey who told Herlocker he wanted to veto any revised ordinance. Without Lacey¹s support, the other two council members who favor a gun ordinance would be outnumbered on the five-member council. Four votes would be required to overturn a mayoral veto.

So once again (see the story on Ohio Governor Taft below) we have the "ruling head" of a town going against the wishes of a majority of the people. Ah well, it was a nice idea (and story) while it lasted...

I don't know the gun laws in Kansas but I doubt if there's anything stopping the folks of the town from going out and getting guns anyway. But maybe if they band together and insist that the town now spend money to hire a cop, the rest of the taxpayers will say, "oh wait a minute..." and the issue will be raised again.

Via Keep And Bear Arms comes this story from the Cleveland Plains Dealer about how Governor Taft (a Republican) plans to veto a bill allowing concealed carry in Ohio. The legislation sailed through both the state senate and house and is clearly the will of the people (except maybe for cops in Cincinnati) and both Republican controlled bodies of lawmakers. Here's a quote:

The Republican governor signaled his intent to veto the bill, because it only partially responded to his demand that permit-holder information be available to the public.

Steve Austria, a Republican from Dayton, the bill's main sponsor in the Senate, defended it as a piece of legislation that had a majority of both chambers and included training requirements and a permit process that will ensure the safety of Ohio residents.

Aside from Taft being a bone-head, I really don't see why permit-holders should be public information. The whole idea of concealed carry is to hide the firearm from public view so as not to make "others" nervous. Would Taft rather that folks just strap-on a gun-belt like in the old western days? And why should it be any business of my neighbor's whether I have a permit or not? Is it their business if I have a computer? How large my mortgage is? What magazines I subscribe to? Are they entitled to know my medical history, that I suffer from Gout? That my daughter had an abortion?

The decision to apply for and receive a permit for concealed carry is a personal one. Not everyone desires to take their protection into their own hands. What would a neighbor do with that info? Move away if they're opposed to guns?

Lawmakers have sufficient votes to override a veto but there's some speculation that they might refuse to do so to a "fellow Republican." That makes no sense to me. If the people of Ohio want concealed carry, and the majority of lawmakers do, then they should defy the Governor and make it law. That's why they're there! Do the bidding of the people who elected them!

Let me state this as clearly as I can: Sen. ( Democrat) John Kerry of Massachusettes is as anti-gun as they come. He is a losing, loser, will-never-get-elected jerk (I just deleted about twenty curse words...) who likes to pose for pheasant hunt photo-ops

BUT! But as I pointed out

exactly one year ago here, Kerry is a "fake, phony, fraud" when it comes to gun-rights. Read that post because it details how he supported the Million Mom March, all 30 attendees. Once again (if I might beat my own drum for a minute) I was way ahead of the curve.

ANYWAY... The NRA is hoping to own a media outlet and let's face it: Yes, it will be a lobbying organization putting their voice out but is that so different from what the Democratic-Liberals do at NBC, CBS, and ABC? Not to mention the New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, and the Boston Globe?

But let's take this hyposcrisy a step forward: Why should the NRA be prevented from buying and broadcasting their message on the airwaves? Oh sure, the liberals will shout "special interest" all the while ignoring the fact that Al Gore wants to start his own liberal broadcasting station. But wait a minute -- what does this have to do with Kerry? Well... He had nothing to say about Gore starting a liberal TV network (of course, that was before Gore endorsed Dean yesterday...) but when it comes to the "pheasant hunter" and supposedly gun rights supporting, but actually totally opposite -- anti-gun, anti-Constitution, no-people-support Kerry thinks the NRA shouldn't have their own broadcasting outlet. Why, here's a quote now...:

Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry doesn't want to tune in to a National Rifle Association channel anytime soon.

The Massachusetts senator sent Federal Election Commission Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub a letter Tuesday asking the commission to block any attempt by the NRA to get a media exemption to campaign finance rules.

The gun-rights lobby is considering acquiring a television or radio outlet and seeking the same exemption from campaign finance rules that news organizations have. If the group won a media exemption, it would be free to say whatever it wanted about candidates at any time and spend unlimited amounts doing so.

"We urge you to prevent the NRA from hijacking America's airwaves with the gun lobby's money," Kerry's letter said. "If the NRA has something to say, it can play by the rules, just like the millions of people in America who do every day."

The NRA has every right to buy their way into the crowded airwaves of our media. I welcome them. Why should only "liberals" be allowed to voice their opinions? If liberal-jerks want to circumvent the First Amendment (which they obviously do on every college campus) than they will just have to fight on constitutional grounds the right of the NRA to buy a media outlet and provide a modicum of balance to the shrill, anti-American rhetoric of the LEFT. I (delete a lot of stuff) think that John Kerry is as anti-Constitutional as any candidate in the race for president could possibly be. Kerry obviously doesn't believe in our Bill of Rights: See this post here for further proof about what a phony Kerry is.

Oh hey, listen folks, Kerry is a piece of crap who will never, NEVER be elected president because he's a fake-phony-fraud. And here is the proof (above) that he doesn't believe in the FIRST Amendment, much less the Second. John Kerry the garbage-can candidate, who says, "I'm for 'hunter rights'" is actually the most anti-gun candidate running in this sorrry election.

Any politician who would like to regulate our God-given freedoms should fall into a ditch. Any politician who thinks they know better than the people he/she serves should fall into a ditch. Our founding fathers knew so much more than our current representatives -- and they created the Bill Of Rights to protect us from YOU! All of them, into ditches. That's my First Amendment right to say.

Me? Talking about football? Weirder things have happened! The Atlanta Falcons have fired Head Coach Dan Reeves. Who am I to say? But Reeves led the Denver Broncos to three Super-Bowls, and was a stand-up coach at the Dallas Cowboys. If the Falcons sucked, I really don't think it was Reeves' fault. But when you're the head-guy, you ARE responsible and answerable for lack of performance of your team. But I feel bad for him. The shitty players bring down the good coaches. *Sigh*

Okay, that's about all the football stuff you'll ever read here...

From the AP:

President Bush quietly signed legislation Tuesday that would extend for 10 years a ban on plastic guns that can be slipped past airport metal detectors or through X-ray machines.

The legislation bans the manufacture, sale or possession of such firearms, but exempts military and intelligence agencies. It renews a ban that was last reauthorized in 1998 and expires this month.

It was passed as officials worry that terrorists would get their hands on weapons undetectable by metal detectors at airports and other security checkpoints.

Explain it to me please. There are guns whose bodies are made of plastic -- such as Glocks -- but their "guts" are still -- have to be, still -- made of steel. That's just a fact of physics. The barrel certainly has to be made of steel to withstand the pressures of the propellant in a cartridge (gun-shell.) I would think that the firing-pin and related mechanisms have to be made of metal too, such as the springs, hammer, etc. So for the gun as manufactured in our current universe, there are plenty of items within it that will clearly show up in an X-Ray.

Now, I don't pretend to be an expert. If some of my kind fellow gun-nuts know better, please email me.

So what is this secret--quiet bill banning? And if Bush was really on our side of the Second Amendment, he would certainly know this and speak plainly about it. But instead, he "quietly" signed this silly bill. Proving once again that what I said last week about him still holds true: Bush really isn't our friend on gun-rights. And I will not blindly support him in the next election. Some candidate (where the hell are you?) has to take a stand on the Second Amendment that proves to me he/she really has a track-record proving support for it.

There are a lot of issues I care about but none of them come close to my primary one of the right to bear-arms for self-defense of me, mine, and my neighbors and my country. Dean used to be for that but this primary race has him lurching towards the left. If he sows-up the nomination will he return to the center? We'll see but until then, he's just "another runner."

Thanks to the four of you who took the time to email me with "well-wishes." And also to the two folks who hit the "tipping cats." I need it badly.

I notice that Prince Andrew is having yet another fundraiser. He's averaging $160,000 a year in donations. Yes, he's a good writer but when he claims that his blog is all he now has time for... Well, I can think of two dozen people on my "links" sidebar that out-produce him every day and write every bit as good as him and they are also holding down full-time real jobs. Instead of tipping Andrew, why not visit some of them and hit their tipping points?

And if you have anything left over, please consider hitting mine.

I've been working on two websites (one brand new, one a re-design) for two charitable organizations I volunteered my services for. Can I just say that JavaScript is one of the most evil things around? And I have all these books about the subject and each one uses different scripting methods and suggested examples and none of them seem to work... I wish I was smart and could figure this out. And since my websites (such as Alphecca) use Tables for layout and JavaScript doesn't work well in nested Tables, I'm further screwed... *Argh*

Hey, Kevin at Wiz Bang Blog is hosting the 2003 Weblog Awards and while I have so many friends nominated in each category that I would never venture suggestions here as to who to vote for... I've actually, somehow, been nominated in the "large mammal" category and if you all wanted to send me some ego-boo... You could (if you wanted) vote for me here. Right now my butt is getting stomped by almost everyone else in the category... I'm so depressed... Actually, I wish all of the contenders well.