JG55

Huck was the reason we got McCain instead of Romney. Don't know if Romney could of beat Obama but I would of hoped he wouldn't loose his mind and try to suspend his campaign. As 6.8 said RINO...

Understand whats going on just seems, too obvious. Too Bad for the small guy and the customer he serves, I never thought to take a Limo to the airport, but for 20-25 bucks it would be worth it.

Video: Nashville forces limo services to charge higher prices « Hot Air

If your concern is that the safety might get knocked into the off position DM Bullard Holster company makes a front pocket holster that covers the safety to protect it from this happening. Search ebay for it runs about $45 and includes a mag holder also for that price. Sig makes a back pocket holster that will protect the safety also runs about $25. Hope this helps

Thanks for the answers. I was specifically thinking about the buffalo bore +p 380 ammo. I agree it is a great little gun and fun to shoot. Now , I know for sure it is totally safe.

Tim, Got that cocked and locked is very safe, folks seem to be objecting to carrying it in their pocket with it cocked and locked becasue of concerns over the safety possibly being knocked to off position, thus thinking the gun might go off accidently. Based on the above information, the safety could be knocked off (not very likely) and still not fire unless the trigger is pulled. So unless that trigger is pulled or there is a defect in the weapon, it will not fire unless you pull the trigger. Have I got this right? By the way where are you getting so much info about the p238? Anyone know if P238 will handle +P ammo?

Here a link to sig forum discussing this issue p238 carry uncocked !! - Topic

What is the Hammer follow safety? Are you sure about the firing pin safety only being disengaged when the trigger is pulled ? I have been carrying mine in a leather front pocket holster and in a leather rear pocket holster and have had no issues with the safety coming off. Has there ever been a case of accidental discharge with the safety getting knocked to off in the cocked and locked mode ?

link to colt magazines at Midway Colt Magazine Colt Mustang 380 ACP 6-Round Blue - MidwayUSA MikePapa1 thanks for the heads up on the extended mag from sig. Looks like a good addition.

+1 for the sig p238 amazingly accurate for being so small, light recoil, no failures of any kind with approx 500 rds through it, Colt mags from Midway work in it, fits in front or back pocket for EDC, only it is a slight bit bigger and heavier than a LCP, TCP etc. Sigs customer service is outstanding

Here's another take on it FWIW Budget Deal Reached, Reagan Triumphant: Debate now not whether to cut, but how much to cut Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:35 am - April 9, 2011. Filed under: 112th Congress,National Politics According to the Hill, in this morning’s wee hours: President Obama and Democratic and Republican congressional leaders reached a last-minute deal Friday to avoid a government shutdown. The agreement, which came after days of partisan sparring and rhetorical drama, would fund the government through the end of September and cut $78.5 billion compared to Obama’s proposed but never enacted fiscal 2011 budget. Not sure if this counts as the “net spending cut” Obama promised in the 2008 campaign, but at least as Kristen Soltis (via Glenn Reynolds) put it while negotiations were still ongoing, ”the big takeaway from all of this: We are currently debating how much to cut rather than debating whether or not to cut.” Philip Klein thinks the deal is one “conservatives should be happy about“: To be sure, conservatives didn’t get much of what they wanted. They didn’t get $100 billion in cuts, or even $61 billion. Planned Parenthood won’t be defunded, neither will ObamaCare. And the EPA won’t be stripped of funding to regulate carbon emissions. But let’s get real. There’s a liberal president and a liberal Senate — House Majority Leader John Boehner cannot impose his will on the rest of the government. But he did use what leverage he had to get a lot more out of Democrats than they wanted to give up. Democrats didn’t want any spending cuts, and President Obama’s original budget proposed spending that was $78.5 billion higher than what was agreed upon tonight. (The House and Senate are passing a six-day stopgap measure that will cut the first $2 billion and give lawmakers more time to craft a final draft of the bill.) The deal includes a provision that would deny federal funds to pay for abortions in Washington, DC and would allow for Senate votes on the Planned Parenthood funding ban and repeal of ObamaCare — both of which will force vulnerable Democrats into tough votes. And keep in mind that the ban on Planned Parenthood funding would have expired at the end of the budget year — Sept. 30 — anyway. Not only did Boehner extract these concessions from Reid, but he managed to get these cuts without going through the ordeal of shutting down the government. Boehner now looks like an honest broker and somebody who is reasonable — a big departure from the image of the petty Speaker Newt Gingrich during the 1995/96 budget battles. Klein is right that given the powers that be in Washington, we couldn’t have gotten an ideal deal. But, at least now the conversation has shifted. We’re no longer talking about “growing” the government, but shrinking it. The vision of Ronald Reagan is now the defining principle of federal budget negotiations. Congress is finally beginning to understand that . A big part. Kudos particularly to Speaker Boehner. He did a fine job in difficult circumstances. He helped fix a problem created by his predecessor’s inaction.

Republicans only control the House and have no control over the Senate or Whitehouse. Seems to me they they changed the conversation in DC from how much to spend to how much to cut. Didn't get everything but they were getting killed by the Dem Senators over Planned Parenthood and where starting to lose the Military Pay debate as well. Until the Republicans come up with away to change the debate on Planned Parent hood , it will stay funded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIA5aszzA18&feature=player_embedded

Thanks, spit my coffee all over my keyboard LOL

Rational conservative vs Typical Liberal

It appears facebook and You tube do not want anyone to see this video of a massacred family. Power Line - Scenes from a massacre

Found this story on Powerline Blog Thought it might be fun to discuss ! Let's Make Obama King Share23 Share Post Print March 10, 2011 Posted by John at 7:09 AM Last night Col. Ralph Peters was on Bill O'Reilly's show, talking about Libya. Peters thinks we should act on behalf of the rebels there, but he expressed skepticism that President Obama will ever do anything. "Obama loves the idea of being President," Peters said, "but he can't make a decision." I think there is a lot of truth to that, even in domestic policy, where Obama has passively deferred to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi on all legislative matters. One can debate whether action is appropriate in Libya or not, but Peters is certainly right when it comes to foreign policy--it is a safe bet that Obama will do nothing, because doing something would require a decision. That got me thinking: Obama enjoys being president, and he especially treasures the symbolic significance of being the first African-American president. That's how his supporters feel, too. I haven't heard anyone defend his actual performance in a long time, but there is still widespread satisfaction with the symbolic value of his presidency. So why don't we make him king? If being the first African-American president has symbolic value, just think what it would mean for the first King of the United States to be African-American! Plus, Michelle would be a queen and Malia and Sasha would be princesses. How cool would that be? I realize that there are constitutional issues with establishing a new office of kingship, but they are nothing that couldn't be cured with a hastily-called constitutional convention. The king would have no duties beyond golf, so Obama would be perfect for the job. Our king would need a place to live, of course--we need to coax Obama out of the White House--so I'm thinking one of those big houses in Newport, Rhode Island would be ideal. Safely out of the way. Then we could hold a special election and choose a real president. Probably, given the temper of the times, he or she would be a Republican. On no account would our new constitutional arrangement allow Joe Biden to succeed Obama. He would make a terrific viceroy, or possibly court jester. Sure, it seems like a radical solution. But consider the alternative. The more I think about it, the better I like it: Obama for King! Power Line - Let's Make Obama King

answers some questions I have about some of the friendships developing in South America with Iran.

Documentary movie on Iran and what they are really up to. Take time to watch it for free. http://www.iraniumthemovie.com/

He melt for Obama Share49 Share Post Print January 22, 2011 Posted by Scott at 6:43 AM <a href='http://agahe.net/~openx/openx/www/delivery/ck.php?n=ac276629&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE' target='_blank'><img src='http://agahe.net/~openx/openx/www/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=2&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE&n=ac276629' border='0' alt='' /></a> The alliance between big government and big business should raise the hackles on the necks of ordinary citizens. In the cases of GM and Chrysler, we have seen a variety of wrongs committed with government power and taxpayer money. Harnessed to the power of government, big business can really get cracking. It can sell products to big government. It can bulk up on direct and indirect subsidies derived from the labor of ordinary citizens. It can take pressure off pricing by creating barriers to entry for potential competitors. It can mitigate the difficulty of persuading ordinary citizens to buy what they are selling at a price that reflects market value. Before the GM and Chrysler bailouts, GE chief executive officer Jeffrey Immelt saw the money to be minted in environmentalism. GE would hold itself out as an environmental leader under the rubric of Ecoimagination. Then it would join up with big government, promote the global warming hoax and cash in on it through the regulatory regime of cap-and-tax. Ecoimagination is the public relations campaign that in part represents GE's strategic partnership with big government. See, for example, the friendly 2005 Forbes article "GE turns green." GE got a taste of the good life when it got in on the bank bailout. As the Washington Post reported in a major article in mid-2009, GE had quietly become the biggest beneficiary of one of the government's key bank bailout programs. At the same time GE also avoided many of the restrictions faced by the big banks The Post noted that GE did not initially qualify for the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, under which the government guaranteed debt sold by banks: "But regulators soon loosened the eligibility requirements, in part because of behind-the-scenes appeals from GE." GE thus joined the big banks collectively saving billions of dollars by raising money for their operations at lower interest rates. The Post reported that GE Capital had issued nearly a quarter of the $340 billion in debt backed by the TLGP. The government's actions have been "powerful and helpful" to the company, Immelt acknowledged in December 2008. More recently, Matt Kibbe showed just how helpful in "GE: Imaginative rent-seeking at work." The cap-and-tax regime promoted by the Obama administration would pay off handsomely for GE. Immelt made his pitch to a Dartmouth crowd in August 2008. "The Wall Street Journal hates all this stuff," Immelt helpfully explained. "They claim global warming's a hoax...I have to deal with this regulation at work every day. You can't afford to be ideological." Hey, I know know what you mean. It helps to have friends in high places. Immelt has supported and befriended Obama. That cap-and-tax thing must have formed a part of Obama's appeal to Immelt. When it comes to making money, you can't afford to be ideological. Yesterday President Obama named Immelt to head his new Council on Jobs and Competitiveness panel. Immelt took to the pages of the Washington Post to explain: "The president and I are committed to a candid and full dialogue among business, labor and government to help ensure that the United States has the most competitive and innovative economy in the world." Fred Barnes briefly explicated the appointment more straightforwardly in "Jeffrey Immelt, Obama's pet CEO." UPDATE: Via Drudge, I see that Chris Stirewalt reviews Immelt's support for picking the taxpayers' pockets via GE's strategic partnership with big government. And Joseph Lawler includes another good quote in "What's good for Jeffrey Immelt is what's good for America": "The fact that I'd like GE to work in concert with where government policy is in the U.S. doesn't mean that I'm a traitor or a bad guy, I think it's just being practical that that's gotta happen." Jeff, you're coming through loud and clear! part 2 He melt for Obama, cont'd Share Share Post Print January 25, 2011 Posted by Scott at 6:15 AM In "He melt for Obama," I explored the strategic partnership between GE and big government. It has really come into its own in the Age of Obama. Tim Carney explains why Obama's friendship with GE and its chairman/chief executive officer Jeffrey Immelt represents crony capitalism at its worst. Carney also cites the Washington Post op-ed column by Immelt that we quoted: Subsidies are GE's lifeblood, and Immelt's own words make that clear. In his op-ed announcing his appointment, Immelt called for a "coordinated commitment among business, labor and government," and wrote that, "government should incentivize ... investment in innovation." He also advocated "partnership between business and government on education and innovation in areas where America can lead, such as clean energy, are essential to sustainable growth." This is Immelt's style. Days after Obama's inauguration, the chief executive officer wrote to shareholders of a post-bailout "reset" in the global economy. "In a reset economy, the government will be a regulator; and also an industry policy champion, a financier, and a key partner." Carney has been on this beat for a while. Do not miss his August 2009 column "How GE's green lobbying is killing US factory jobs." In that column Carney explores GE's role in advancing the legislation that will kill the incandescent light bulb. I have written about the legislation in several posts including "Get your hand out of my shower" without understanding GE's role in promoting it. The GE part of the story provides a valuable case study that illuminates, shall we say, the big picture. Today Carney makes this essential point: [W]herever Obama has led, GE has followed. Obama has championed cap and trade in greenhouse gasses, and GE has started a business dedicated to creating and trading greenhouse gas credits. As Obama expanded subsidies on embryonic stem cells, GE opened an embryonic stem-cell business. Obama pushed rail subsidies, and GE hired Linda Daschle -- wife of Obama confidant Tom Daschle -- as a rail lobbyist. GE, with its windmills, its high-tech batteries, its health care equipment, and its smart meters, was the biggest beneficiary of Obama's stimulus. To get these gears in sync isn't cheap: The company has spent $65.7 million on lobbying during the Obama administration -- more than any other company by far. So much for Obama's war on lobbyists. For much of the media, the nuances will be lost: You're either pro-business or anti-business. But the distinction is crucial between making a profit through subsidy, regulation, and bailouts on one hand, and competition and innovation on the other hand. The latter creates wealth. The former consumes it. While Obama's favors for the likes of GE, Google, Pfizer, and Boeing should demolish his finely honed image as the scourge of the special interests, the real problem is not hypocrisy -- or that GE's profits and share prices are soaring. The problem with Obamanomics is that it kills the very entrepreneurship that Obama is always touting. In partnership with Obama, GE exploits the power of big government to enrich its shareholders while making the rest of us poorer and less free.

White House Says Pro-Commie Anti-American Song Played at Obama White House State Dinner Was Not an Insult Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, January 25, 2011, 5:04 AM When Commie Anti-American Songs Are Not Commie Anti-American Songs… The White House claims that the anti-American song played at the Obama White House State Dinner was not an insult. That’s bold… Maybe they liked it? Obama has been in office for only 2 years and already they’re playing Red Chinese commie songs at State Dinners in the White House. The US was humiliated in eyes of Chinese by a song used to inspire anti-Americanism at the Obama State Dinner for Hu Jintao. Internet users in China praised the pianist after this great act of courage. On Monday, the Obama White House and state-run media insisted it was not an insult. ABC News reported, via The Examiner: White House spokesman Tommy Vietor told ABC News that “any suggestion that this was an insult to the United States is just flat wrong. As Lang Lang has stated before, he plays this song regularly because it is one of his favorite Chinese melodies, which is very widely known and popular in China for its melody. Lang Lang played the song without lyrics or reference to any political themes during the entertainment portion of the State Dinner. He simply stated the song’s title and noted it was well known in China.†Lang has issued a statement saying that he “selected this song because it has been a favorite of mine since I was a child. It was selected for no other reason but for the beauty of its melody.†His goal is to “bridge cultures together through the beauty and inspiration of music.†Asked what he thought of the controversy, Kenneth Lieberthal — director of the John L. Thornton China Center at the Brookings Institution and a former special assistant to President Clinton for national security affairs and senior director for Asia on the National Security Council – said “I have enough confidence to be easily able to accept Lang lang’s assertion that this is simply a favorite melody of his, that is obviously a Chinese melody, and that he used it without any thought that it might have a political resonance for some that simply never occurred to him.†Lieberthal added that “It did occur to me that had the situation been reversed I can easily imagine many Chinese bloggers weighing in along the same way some of our more conservative media have weighed in, but frankly it’s ridiculous. If a musician had no such intent I don’t feel compelled to assign intent to him. The US is confident enough, secure enough and open enough to easily accept his assurance that he didn’t mean anything by it.†But Nick Eberstadt, a researcher at the American Enterprise Institute, tells ABC News that the song is “classic Mao-era anti-American invective and it’s astonishing that none of the China experts on the American side called it out before it was put into the program for the banquet.†Who knows… In another couple of years with Obama regime in charge we might all be forced to sing this at public events

For what is claimed to be the best PR team in the United States, the Obama administration is a big failure that continues to stumble. World-renowned pianist Lang Lang from China played the tune, “My Motherland” during the State dinner for China in the White House. Problem is, according to the Epoch Times, is that the song is a pro-communist, anti-American propaganda piece. The tune is a staple among the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for decades. The song refers to the Korean War as the “movement to resist America and help [North] Korea.” The song also names the United States as the “the Jackal” that should be hunted down. Of course, the Chinese is abuzz that their countryman would play such a tune in America. The song Lang Lang played describes how beautiful China is and then near the end has this verse, “When friends are here, there is fine wine /But if the jackal comes /What greets it is the hunting rifle.” The “jackal” in the song is the United States. The name of the song is “My Motherland,” originally titled “Big River.” In an interview broadcast on Phoenix TV, the first thing Lang Lang is quoted as saying is that he chose the piece. He then said, “I thought to play ‘My Motherland’ because I think playing the tune at the White House banquet can help us, as Chinese people, feel extremely proud of ourselves and express our feelings through the song. I think it’s especially good. Also, I like the tune in and of itself, every time I hear it I feel extremely moved.” “Playing this song praising China to heads of state from around the world seems to tell them that our China is formidable, that our Chinese people are united; I feel deeply honored and proud.” What’s worse is, the White House knew Lang Lang would play this song in advance. Either they knew what the tune is about and simply ignored it hoping no one would notice, or didn’t even bother to check what the song is about. Or this can simply be misreporting on the part of the Epoch Times. I am hoping that’s the case. Wall Street Journal reports more on this event.