Smith

Funny how no one (media, Dems, etc.) talk about the actual recession Bush inherited with all things 911 on top of that and it took Bush less than a year. Right now we haven't even had 1 quarter of negative GDP (it takes 3 for a recession) and all we hear is the messiah might not be able to rescue the economy, but we'll have hope and change! Already seeing the blame Bush game for Obama's projected failures. Geesh, every election is historic. Every President inherits a slumping economy. I too look forward to seeing how thing stack up and not based on how I feel abot the economy but by the actual numbers. Numbers don't lie. Statistically, Bush as been very good and I'll put them against anyone but reagan, but his opponents will give him no credit. Only blame for what they can't blame on themselves. This get's so tired.

I believe bigger is always better and so I carry a Deagle in .50! Anything else is for weenies. Besides it is the only one stop bullet! Seriously I've read all the "facts" from everything ever posted and I carry a 9mm for various reasons. These days with the advancement in bullet designs, anything 9mm and above is virtually equal. BTW - there is only 1 one stop shot. The base of the skull from the rear. everything else is bleed out.

Would that be the new spirit of patriotism we are summoning?

So where are the Palin riots? I heard the Police were getting ready for them and being the right wing, Christian, gun loving, conservative, radical I want to be a part of the stand but I can't find any? Anyone know?

This may be a blessing in disguise for our side. A clear victory can't be won without a clear enemy and this could provide that. Hillary would have been far more dangerous and destructive to our rights because she appeared less overtly threating. As a skilled politician she would have been able to slowly whittle away without much of the nation realizing what had happened. Much like her husband did. Obama, in his inexperienced way, has shown his hand and is not good at hiding his radical ideas. Now people are expecting him and as Sun Tzu said deception is an essential part of victory. Consequently that is how we have gotten to this point. What is done in the shadows will be brought into the light. The light is starting to shine.

You can HOPE for euphoria all you want, but when the drug wears off reality is harder than before. False is hope is worse than despair, because it takes you to the highest floor and then gently nudges you off! Think about the movie Independence Day when the morons are all celebrating on the rooftops and the light of their joy and hope shines on them..... right before it obliterates the entire city....... yeah, I see parallels.

The only way that would happen is for him to buy his own slogan, "Change". His ideology is not new nor untried. In fact it is the opposite. It is an old ideology that keeps getting dragged from the grave of failure and death in hopes that this time when the dust is blown off it will work. I can almost guarantee with certainty what will happen as has been mentioned numerous times, ala Jimmy Carter. This can only be exciting for Carter, who now has a chance not to be the worst president. The only one closed minded is the one who can't read about or remember the historical precedents for his "Change" and see the miserable failure that it has always been no matter what angle it was approached from. Of course it is these same apologist, who have swallowed the toxic Bush hate pill, that will still blame Bush when Obama fails. My hope is not that he will surprise us, but more realistically that he will be such a poor politician he won't get anything done and once again America will realize that it is individual freedom, initiative, and ingenuity that drives this country to success. Not the country that drives it's people to success.

The smith at Guns and Leather said he (I also heard good recommendations) can do a good job. Other than that or Coal Creek you are going to be shipping it. Cylinder and Slide, Arizona Response Systems, Heirloom Precision, or Novak. They gonna cost you though. For a low budget improvement, take out the stupid mag disconnect, get a wide combat trigger, and a spring reduction kit (all from C&S) and your trigger will go from blah to nice. Not custom but nice.

Did you send it in for the warranty?

Really? What issues did you have? I never heard anything but good about them.

Yeah, I'd probably get the High Point carbine for that price and leave my Glock a Glock. The High point will get you all the same benefits at a better price and let you still use you're Glock without having to disassemble it. Of course that is assuming you want it in .40 or 9mm. With the money you save you can pick up one of the ATI stocks and make it look like the Berreta. http://www.atigunstocks.com/products.aspx?category=6&page=1&id=18

The TFO's are great. Super bright in the day (my main reason for them) and perfect for night. I always used the green/yellow combo. If you are just looking at cheap alternatives for the P6, I'd go with the night sights.

How dare he get fired over those small details. Are you kidding me! I want to be a cop in Alaska! Anyone one of those would have landed him in jail anywhere else. Tasing a child and DUI on duty! Wow.

Congress? Still a work in progress, but getting there. Justice Dept.? Already done via help from the Clinton years. Most of Bush's difficulties are from this very department. Dept. of Defense? Again Clinton really helped here. Still a work in progress, but moving more in his direction all the time. Supreme Court? With at least two appointments that will be another check in the done category. It's not that difficult to do anymore. Now tell me I was paranoid about Clinton and liberalism!

Nicer Mak!

I'm a little ignorant on suppressors, but I was under the impression that suppresors take care of muzzle flash. That seems like a lot of flash? BTW I have shot with Raquel and she is very nice.

So far all we've seen of these guns are pictrures! Nice to see them getting some use!

You know they will still blame Bush. He was so bad even the "messiah" couldn't undue the 8 yrs of Bush/Cheaney policies. It's almost laughable how apologetic dems are about dems.

I don't know about TN, but in NW Arkansas there are a bunch. It is definitely a weird thing to hear them. Over there you have to be careful with the Mountain Lions/Pumas/Cougars/ etc. when night hunting for coyotes and other varmints. They will definitely come out to investigate the calls. There has also been a rash of attacks out west from these beautiful animals. They are making a comeback nationally so it wouldn't surprise me to see them here.

The more I see those the more I like them.

Every time production can't keep up with the population there is an inevitability... usually war. Those wars tend to thin the population pretty good. Gloomy I know, but call it "market" correction.

A couple of references for you. 1729 - Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" Walter Williams http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams022499.asp Population control nonsense (JWR) ----(http://www.jewishworldreview.com) MULTIBILLIONAIRE TED TURNER, Jane Fonda's husband, told last week's 27th annual meeting of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA): "We have to defeat those congressmen and senators who are standing in the way of progress. We've got to win the next election." Turner, founder of CNN and vice chairman of Time-Warner Inc., was sounding the alarm that something must be done about overpopulation. This father of five said we could achieve the "ideal" world population of 2 billion people, as opposed to today's 6 billion, "if everybody adopted a one-child policy for 100 years." How did Turner arrive at the ideal population? He learned it from his mentor, professor Paul Erlich, author of the 1968 best-seller, "The Population Bomb." In that book, Erlich predicted major food shortages in the United States, and by "the 1970s ... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." Erlich forecasted the starvation of 65 million Americans between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Erlich saw England in a more desperate situation, saying, "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." Idiots like Erlich and organizations such as Planned Parenthood, the State Department's Agency for International Development and NFPRHA constantly sound nonsense warnings about how overpopulation produces disaster and poverty. There is absolutely no relationship between high populations, disaster and poverty. Population control idiots might consider Zaire's meager population density of 39 people per square mile to be ideal while Hong Kong's population density of 247,501 people per square mile is problematic. Hong Kong is 6,000 times more crowded than Zaire. Yet Hong Kong's per capita income is $8,260 while Zaire, the world's poorest country, has a per capita income of less than $200. Planet Earth is loaded with room. We could put the world's entire population into the United States. Doing so would make our population density 1,531 people per square mile. That's a far lower population density than what now exists in New York (11,440), Los Angeles (9,126) and Houston (7,512). The entire U.S. population could move to Texas and each family of four would enjoy 2.9 acres of land. If the entire world's population moved to Texas, California, Colorado and Alaska, each family of four would enjoy nine-tenths of an acre of land. So-called overpopulation problems are really a result of socialistic government practices that reduce the capacity of people to educate, clothe, house and feed themselves. Poor countries are rife with agricultural restrictions, export and import controls, restrictive licensing and price controls, not to mention gross human rights abuses that encourage their most productive people to emigrate. The most promising anti-poverty tool for poor people and poor countries is personal liberty. But let's get back to the population-control gang and ask: Suppose the rest of us don't feel like adopting a one-child policy, then what? The elite's answer will be to use brute government force, like China does, to impose a one-child policy. You say: "Williams, what would make you say that? Just ask, who are the heroes of America's liberals, including Ted Turner's wife, Jane Fonda? They are some of history's most despicable blood thirsty tyrants, like Mao Zedong, Lenin, Stalin and Castro. Don't forget that it was the 1960s campus liberals who marched around singing the praises of Mao, Lenin and Ho Chi Min. The difference between now and then is that many of these liberals have moved up to become congressmen, senators, presidents, college professors and government workers

You guys have lost it. Will it be bad? Yeah, is it the end of the world as we know it? NO! We survived Carter, this will be similar IMO. Did the world recover from 911? Yes. The Great Depression? Yes. Did we recover from WWI & II? Yes. Have we recovered from every other world crisis know to man? Yes. In fact, in most cases we continue to build and advance because/in spite of these kind of circumstances. Will things be forever changed? Of course they will. That is just life and the human existence. "There is nothing new under the sun." Loosen up the tin foil. The blood is not flowing to your brains anymore.

You are absolutely right. "Rich" people don't have their money sitting around in checking or savings accounts. They are in tax shelter and investments that have no tax liability or little to no liability. They use leverage on their invested money as living expenditures. The only taxes that can be collected are on payroll and income that most middle class Americans make in the form of salaries etc. Again, "rich" people don't get a huge paycheck that can be taxed (most of the time) instead it is in the form of stock options, benefits, expense type stuff. Example - I agree to work for 500k per year but I am paid only 100k in "salary". The rest is paid as housing, car, travel, stock, etc. all those are tax write offs. The only "rich" people by Obama's definition and tax structure will be middle class America that makes a paycheck. BTW - think Carter. 22% interest rates, astronomical inflation, true GDP recession, debt, etc. Of course this will all be blamed on Bush's policies that were just so bad the Messiah couldn't fix all the damage.

I really see Obama as a less effective Jimmy Carter. He owes so many people and has such little political clout, I doubt he'll get anything done. Dems are not know for efficiency in government once in power. They are good at getting in power but start to in fight (Republicans as well). Billiary had a Dem congress, judicial, and executive control and Hillary care failed miserably as did several other projects and he was a skilled politician. Obama will be comletley ineffective as a President even with congress.