Archive for 28 Feb 2012

It’s the Shooter, Not the Gun…

Posted: 28 Feb 2012 in Guns
Tags: ,

Pretty good article about the basics rather than the bling that make for a better shooter.

It’s the Shooter, Not the Gun

All the tacticool gear in the world won’t turn you into a better shooter.
By Steve Adelmann

Sometimes our attempts to have the best shooting firearms cause us to lose sight of an important principle: Knowing how to use them safely and effectively should always come first. That does not mean you cannot buy a nicely appointed rifle and then learn how to use it. It simply means you cannot place that same rifle under the bed and expect it to make up for your shortcomings when it is time to pull the trigger.

I was reminded of this during a recent conversation with an old SOF buddy. He is one of the few guys I know who I can trust with my life, because I have. We worked together in uniform overseas for many years and had each other’s backs on several hair-raising occasions. A master of articulating common-sense solutions to everything, my friend inspired the title of this column while we were discussing different approaches to helping people learn to shoot well. As a tactical instructor, he often sees students who are more focused on the features of their tricked-out guns than on learning how to shoot them. This is a common problem, and we need to remind ourselves from time to time that learning to crawl before walking is important in all things requiring any amount of skill. Running should be somewhere far down the line.

Before buying a high-end tactical long gun, first consider whether some of your hard-earned dollars might be better spent on professional training. A beginning or self-taught shooter can become quite proficient behind the sights of a basic rifle or carbine once he or she is taught to use it properly. Conversely, having a top-of-the-line blaster will not provide any edge if you do not first have a solid foundation upon which to build.

via It’s the Shooter, Not the Gun | Shooting Illustrated.

Posted: 28 Feb 2012 in Politics

Excellent post.

Mike McDaniel's avatarStately McDaniel Manor

A recent incident in Grand Junction, Colorado has struck familiar chords.  I briefly lived in Grand Junction as a young adult, but more important, I am a teacher and professional musician, specifically, a classically trained singer.  The incident happens to be about music, religion, politics, liberty and education.

At Grand Junction High School, senior James Harper found himself in a vexing predicament.  A member of the school’s choir, Harper is also a Christian, and when the choir director, Marcia Weiland, chose a piece—“Zikr”–by Indian composer A.R. Rahman, Harper was conflicted.  The piece is quite clearly a Muslim song (something of an oxymoron, particularly for the more Islamist-leaning who frown–at best–on any music).

The lyrics (via Gateway Pundit, via the Examiner):

Those of you, who seek Allah’s attention, Come, as you are called by Allah.
There is no better deed than ZIKR, said the Holy Prophet of Allah. And those…

View original post 2,382 more words

Posted: 28 Feb 2012 in Politics

As walthe310 stated, fuck is misspelled, but that’s OK.
I get it.

boudicabpi's avatarBoudica BPI Weblog

Via Canada Free Press

This is a world in which nobody asked the Islamic Conference, a grouping of the 56 Islamic countries, to issue an apology when Christians are attacked and churches are burned in Egypt or in Pakistan. And had we heard a word from any Islamic leader anywhere about the radical Muslims in Nigeria who are not only burning the churches, but burning women and children who are in the churches, when I hear that, I’ll expect my president to start issuing apologies. Read more…

Follow us, donate and help us stay on-line.

Follow Boudicabpi on Twitter

View original post

And once again, the asshole in the White House wants to put the problems of America on the backs of the military. Specifically, on the backs of the active military,  retirees and their families.

They’ve already sacrificed for this nation, now that they are done with that, the government can screw them over.

We’re not a commodity anymore. Just a liability.

Thanks for your service asshole, now get on Obamacare and like it.

Trashing Tricare
Obama to cut healthcare benefits for active duty and retired US military

The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The proposal is causing a major rift within the Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Several congressional aides suggested the move is designed to increase the enrollment in Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges.

The disparity in treatment between civilian and uniformed personnel is causing a backlash within the military that could undermine recruitment and retention.

The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017.

Many in Congress are opposing the proposed changes, which would require the passage of new legislation before being put in place.

“We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population,” Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a Republican from California, said in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more.”

Administration officials told Congress that one goal of the increased fees is to force military retirees to reduce their involvement in Tricare and eventually opt out of the program in favor of alternatives established by the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

via Trashing Tricare | Washington Free Beacon.

Sounds about right. You libtards are probably happier than pigs in shit about this, but, just remember, when things change, and they will change, you’re next.

Is the IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties?

In January and February of this year, the Internal Revenue Service began sending out letters to various local Tea Parties across the country. Mailed from the same Cincinnati, Ohio IRS office, these letters have reached Tea Parties in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio, and Texas (we are hearing of more daily). There are several common threads to these letters: all are requesting more information from these independent Tea Parties in regard to their nonprofit 501(c)(4) applications (for this type of nonprofit, donations are not deductible). While some of the requests are reasonable, much of them are strikingly onerous and, dare I say, Orwellian in nature.

What are local Tea Partiers to think with requests like “Please identify your volunteers” or “are there board members or officers who have run or will run for office (including relatives)”? What possible reason would the IRS have for Tea Parties to “name your donors” when said donations are non-deductible? These are just a few of the questions asked by the IRS in these letters, and one cannot help but suspect an intrinsic threat encompassing all these demands.

The other question is the timing of these IRS letters requesting reams of copies and hundreds of hours of work and potentially thousands of dollars in accounting/legal fees (all due in two weeks). Some of these Tea Party groups have not received anything concerning their nonprofit status since 2010 prior to these letters.

These documents are further undermined by a letter sent to the IRS Commissioner Shulman. Signed by six Senators, it requests that the commissioner investigate 501(c)(4) groups to determine whether they are engaging in substantial campaign activity, including opposition to any candidate. Who signed this letter? Senators Schumer, Franken, Udall, Shaheen, Whitehouse, Merkley and Bennet — all Democrats.

via » Is the IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties? – Big Government.