flaco

Thanks, Boys- Amazingly enough, Karl, I feel an affinity to you. Especially, Thanks ken98k- I printed the article out and took it in to show my Boss. We imported about a half a dozen Popes from Europe last year, for a collector in the midwest. I have an image on the computer at work. Recently, Z posted some images for me on the Accurate Reloading forum. I expect I'll have to post here. But maybe I can talk him into putting the Pope image on his server. It's an amazing rifle. Best, flaco I guess I already said that. Oh well. LOL.

I'm still trying to get used to the new layout. So you can add me to the list of old dogs. Yep, I still drop in to see how much Karl and FC can raise my blood pressure. [i expect I've done the same for them. LOL.] Anyway, I was looking for the really wonderful post on Harry Pope. I couldn't find it. My thanks to whomever made this contribution. Our shop imported five Pope and Pope-Stevens for a collector in the Midwest last year, and thought someone might want to help me post an image. As I no longer have a server to post images on. I'm still working in a target rifle shop--I love it--and shooting 600 yd Benchrest. Most recently I've been shooting 1,000 yds, which is very challenging, but other than the fact that the range is about 400 miles away, I love that too. Hope you boys are all well, flaco

As far as I know, olive oil is commonly cited as the most healthy oil. But it starts to smoke at relatively low temperatures, so it might not be best for cooking. Also, I believe heating changes its properties. As to temperature, peanut oil is very good for high temperature. To my knowledge. If you're not too skeptical, I believe there's enough truth on this site to make consulting it worthwhile. http://whfoods.org/ They have many stir-fry recipes, but recommend using a couple of tablespoons of chicken stock in lieu of fat. I applaud your concern, Jason. flaco

I began reloading back in the '80s, when I was married. I lost all my rifles in the divorce, and it took me about 20 years to start shooting again. When I resumed reloading, I started with a Lyman T Mag 2. It's a fine press. I only replaced it because I'm convinced that for target shooting the Forster Co-Ax is better. flaco

Merry Christmas, all you guys, to you and yours... And especially to those who see politics from a different perspective than I. Best, flaco

Are you stateside yet, fmsniper? I know we'll all be more comfortable when you're safely home. I am intrigued by the idea of a 6.5x55 M1. What a rifle that will be. We got a sweet Carl Gustav CG-63--the target version of the Swede '96--in the shop this week, and it's a beauty. Good to hear from you, flaco

We all have conflicts, Tony, between the idealistic and pragmatic. In some cases, they're hard to resolve. I have no idea how far you are--in terms of years--from Federal retirement, but it's something you've contributed to and earned, and I would hope you'd stick around long enough to enjoy it. Wounded G.I.s need guys like you. As to Obama, there's no doubt that he's made a career of work that helps others while helping himself. I agree that he's largely untested. Still, Barack Obama has an analytical mind and he's an abstract thinker. You guys talk about the Constitution, but, well...Obama taught Constitutional Law at Chicago Law School for 10 years. When it comes to the Constitution, you don't have the credentials to have a conversation with this man. And neither does Rush Limbaugh, who should have gone to a penitentiary years ago for drug abuse. He's a junkie. My most important point has been made by history: Eight years of George W. Bush have brought this once-proud nation to it's knees. (Although it's fun to read that Rush is already calling this the "Obama Depression." Hey, I need a laugh once in a while.) Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama. (As an aside, while I respect Karl and his Semper Fi! tradition, call me a fool for thinking Karl would be lucky--and proud--to be in Colin Powell's Honor Guard.) The harsh evidence shows--and I'm reluctant to mention this, as there are many here I truly enjoy, and count among my friends--that John McCain found his greatest support among high school or lower educated rural white males, especially evangelical Christians. This is a shrinking demographic. Sarah Palin is an ignoramus. While it is true that Al Gore won more than 500,000 more popular votes than George W. Bush, but lost in electoral votes, Obama won by a significant majority of popular votes. The people have spoken, and they don't want to see anything other than the hind end of George W. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzales, Bolton, and anyone who has ever called himself a neo-conservative. It wasn't even close Tony. Let me put it in these harsh terms: The American people have chosen a Harvard educated negro liberal, and really, really, want to see George W. Bush, and anyone supported by Rush Limbaugh and right wing--I'd use the word conservative here, but conservatives want a balanced budget--media pundits enjoy a happy retirement on the ranch of their choice. Personally, I be happiest if you hang in there in the US Army, taking good care of wounded G.I.s, and retired in Texas. Or any state of your choice, other than California. flaco

I have really good news for you, Tony! Obama isn't, by an reasonable definition of the words, a Marxist/Socialist! That's just vicious propaganda that's been circulated by the war mongering war profiteering plutocrats in the Bush Administration. It's true, though, that if you make more than $250,000 a year, under Obama--presuming he can get his tax plan through Congress--your income tax will go up. Think of it, Tony. You'd be reduced to the mere upper-middle class. You might have to cut back on the Armani, Louis Vuitton, and Dom Perignon. Why, you might have trouble paying for the gas in your Mustang! Not to mention educating your daughters. Now... if you don't make over $250,000 and you don't have enough time to get that sweet Federal pension and all those nice benefits, you might want to think about continuing your job. Or you could come here, to beautiful California--it could be worse!--where the nurses have a very strong union, and start at about $60,000. And with your experience, you'd be way ahead of the game. And your daughters could go to a University of California campus, and get a really great education at taxpayers expense! Whatever your choice, you can console yourself with the thought that a huge part of America is swollen with pride that this is the only nation on earth where a representative of a race brought in chains from Africa a mere couple of centuries ago is now, by the strong choice of the people, going to be President! flaco

I'm apprehensive, Karl, like anyone else who can think. I despise Joe Biden, and don't think much of Sarah Brady who has interpreted the election as a referendum on gun control. My view is that Barack didn't do this all by himself. One needn't be a political analyst to see that the results of this election are a backlash, the direct result of eight years of monumental mismanagement by the Bush Administration. To me, this--the mismanagement--is not open to interpretation. No President, and no Party, for that matter, can hope to continue with a 25% approval rating. The only gloating I will do is to remind my fellow contributors of my post--how many years ago?--to the effect that the Democrats need do nothing, as sooner or later Bush policies would result in the kind of disarray our nation faces now. I believe we were in better condition after Pearl Harbor. To me, nothing can replace a sound, productive economy, and right now our treasury is tapped. We're borrowing from the Chinese, and everyone else. Note that neither candidate spoke of balancing the budget. Didn't this use to be one of the planks of the Republican platform? I'm hoping that as he promised, Obama will move towards the center. And include in his Cabinet those from the other side of the aisle. I take succor from Colin Powell's endorsement. I believe Powell to be one of our strongest leaders, and hope he is included in the new Administration. I am consoled by the fact that when Obama was elected President of Law Review at Harvard, he was nominated by his conservative colleagues. They chose him for his moderation. On the issue that brings us all here, I believe experience is a harsh teacher. Obama's experience of firearms is urban, and to him they represent violence, crime, and bloodshed. My perspective is that our cause will be best served by an education campaign. One of us needs to invite the President Elect to the range, to sample the simple pleasures--and discipline--of trap and skeet, benchrest, position shooting, reloading, and all the things that we so enjoy. Someone needs to explain that history is huge factor in the pleasure Pennsylvanians take from firearms, and tell him about the importance of Kentucky rifles, their place in American history, and that rather than coming from Kentucky, they come from Pennsylvania. Someone need to show him a fine custom rifle, and explain the work and craftsmanship that goes into it. What we don't need--and what scares me--is the kind of antagonistic vitriol I've seen on the internet. The kind of ranting that can only confirm to liberals that we are, as so many believe, paranoid, crazed, dangerous idiots. flaco

Spiris? Hello? Actually, those using Mausers at the Battle of San Juan Hill were Spaniards. Not Mexicans. flaco

You do a disservice to your fellow warrior, Karl. If you check his biography, you'll find Powell was born in Harlem--what could be tougher than this, other than, perhaps, being born black in Mississippi?--and is a product of Army college ROTC. You'll notice he wears the Combat Infantry Badge? Powell is not "... a creation of the GOP." He has, however, contributed his many talents to many Republican administrations. All of which have benefitted from his contributions. Powell's support of Obama is consistent with the sound judgment that has marked his career. flaco

I've been watching with interest the trial of another Alaskan, Senator Ted Stevens. Most of us know he's on trial for accepting gifts, and has take the unusual strategy of testifying in his own defense. Now... unlike Senator McCain, I have no problem with earmarks. For as long as I can remember Members of Congress have been judged by their ability to bring Federal perks back to those who elected them. I see nothing wrong with this. To me, Senator McCain has made a weak attempt to separate himself from the rest by attacking this process. A couple of thoughts come to mind: Earmarks make up a miniscule percentage of the Federal Budget, so McCain's stance is really much ado about nothing. It's tokenism. Secondly, I don't at all begrudge states that really need help, like those in the "Rust Belt," that have suffered from the demise of manufacturing, getting a good share of our tax money. So... if Senator Stevens has brought home the bacon to Alaska, all the better. Because Alaska has not always been the very wealthy oil state it is now. Also, I'm skeptical of his accuser. Another convicted felon, trying to make a deal with the prosecutors. As it turns out, Senator Stevens is a more than able witness on his own behalf. He's a graduate of Harvard Law School. Where have I heard that before? Not to mention Stevens is 84. And sharp as a tack. May I suggest much sharper than the sometimes muddled Senator from Arizona? Anyway, Alaskans, I imagine, are not at all surprised that their Senator is giving advice to the Prosecutor. Who has already been warned about Prosecutorial misconduct. Personally, I believe Senator Stevens to be a basically honest politician--if that is possible--and hope he prevails. flaco

If my fellow contributors actually read newspapers, they'd know that the lead Federal Investigator in the Weathermen case went to the trouble to write the "New York Times". Here's the letter. May we put the "...palling around with terrorists...." claim to bed? flaco

To focus a little more on the Palin issue, she's ignorant. I read myself to sleep last night with Winston Churchill's "The Gathering Storm". Granted, Churchill was probably the greatest leader of the 20th century. Is it inappropriate to compare Palin to Churchill? Not at all. Ours is a profoundly rich nation, and the times we face may be just as dangerous as those Churchill faced '38-'39. While Obama may not be Churchill, we may remind ourselves that far from being a terrorist, he was voted President of Law Review at Harvard Law School, and is thus deeply invested in the American system, and the product of one of the best educational systems America has to offer. While I have great admiration for a woman who can skin a moose, I don't intend to vote to place her in an office a heartbeat away from the American Presidency. flaco

Not reading newspapers is a pretty good prescription for ignorance. Better to read newspapers, and be skeptical. On the other hand, if you're looking only to find confirmation of your biases, continue to watch Fox News. flaco

Your images are too big. Most images on the net are in jpeg form. The rule of thumb is 72 dpi. This means that if your image is 10 inches across, at 72 dpi, it will be 720 pixels across. Even this is probably too large. Anyway, you need to use your image manipulation program to massage those puppies down to somewhere in this range or smaller. Best, flaco

Brenden- The 6x47L is actually a necked down 6.5x47 Lapua. When the chambering came out about three years ago, most of the accuracy nuts put an emphasis on using the larger case size to move 6mm bullets faster. [As an aside, you may be referring to the 6x47 that was a necked-up .222 magnum. This was a very popular short range chambering until the advent of the 6mm PPC. My shooting buddy still has a 40 year old 40X, and is relatively competitive with the 100 yard range nuts.] As it turns out, the original may be better, because of the ability to move the higher B.C. 6.5 bullets at better speeds. Thus better performance in the wind. As to eyes, well, I'm 60. I have one of the new Sightron 8-32x56 scopes, and it's considered comparable to the Night Force. At about half the price. My boss shot on the Palma Veterans Team a couple of years, so we do sell a lot of Palma--long range, iron sights--rifles. Az, the club I'm shooting at has an unusual program: We shoot paper targets first, and then Silhouettes at 600 yards. It's amazing how many of those animals get away. But a blast to knock them down. All-in-all, I'm having a great time. This is not my home club, but adjacent, about an hour away up a windy mountain road with 2,000 ft. drop-offs. The greatest danger on coming home is the red-hot sport bikes that use this road as their own personal track. It's really beautiful country, not at all what others think of as Southern California. And all the members are supportive. We had a new guy a couple of months ago, who was having trouble getting on paper. One of the event organizers said, "Okay you guys, let's help Tom get shooting." And they did. Aren't gun nuts great? flaco

Well, Az... in our monthly match a couple of weeks ago I shot a 1.800" for score. And, like all target guys, I think there's room for improvement. As an aside, I was beaten for best group, by the guy I usually shoot with. He shot a 1.599" using a rifle similar to mine. Just a different barrel. Same chambering. I am absolutely hooked. As my shooting buddy says, "100 yards is for sissies." LOL. flaco

It is axiomatic that one of our current political problems is... rather than addressing our problems, our leaders seem intent mostly on calling each other names. Am I the only to grieve over the paucity of solutions our leaders bring to current crises? "I've got a plan," they all say. Mainly, these have to do with dollars, and rarely do they address the issues. Personally--and I know you'll all have a hard time believing this--I'm conservative on some issues--I believe in a balanced budget--and liberal on others. Liberal in the sense of Liberty. In the sense that now retired Supreme Court Judge Sandra Day O'Connor was: O'Connor grew up on a ranch, and believed in individual liberty. Most importantly, I'm pragmatic: If it works, that's fine with me. In that spirit, I'll suggest two books we might learn from. The first is by a West Point graduate, Andrew Bacevich: "The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism." I'll lift the review from the Washington Post, as it appears on Amazon: "From The Washington Post Reviewed by Robert G. Kaiser This compact, meaty volume ought to be on the reading list of every candidate for national office -- House, Senate or the White House -- in November's elections. In an age of cant and baloney, Andrew Bacevich offers a bracing slap of reality. He confronts fundamental questions that Americans have been avoiding since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, first of all: What is the sole superpower's proper role in the world? Bacevich is not running for office, so he is willing to speak bluntly to his countrymen about their selfishness, their hubris, their sanctimony and the grave problems they now face. He scolds a lot, but does so from an unusual position of authority. He is a West Point graduate who served his country as an Army officer for more than 20 years, retiring as a colonel with a reputation as one of the leading intellectuals in our armed services. A Catholic and self-described conservative, he earned a PhD from Princeton and taught at West Point and Johns Hopkins before joining the Boston University faculty in 1998 to teach history and international relations. His many articles and four previous books have made him a respected voice in debates on national security. In this book Bacevich treats the writings of theologian and philosopher Reinhold Niebuhr as a kind of scripture. He calls Niebuhr, who died in 1971 at age 78, a "towering presence in American intellectual life from the 1930s through the 1960s" who "warned that what he called 'our dreams of managing history' -- born of a peculiar combination of arrogance and narcissism -- posed a potentially mortal threat to the United States." Repeatedly, Bacevich uses quotations from Niebuhr to remind us of the dangers of American hubris. Bacevich describes an America beset by three crises: a crisis of profligacy, a crisis in politics and a crisis in the military. The profligacy is easily described: What was, even in the author's youth several decades ago, a thrifty society whose exports far outdistanced its imports has become a nation of debtors by every measure. Consumption has become the great American preoccupation, and consumption of imported oil the great chink in our national armor. When on Sept. 11, 2001, the United States suffered the most serious attack on its soil since 1812, our government responded by cutting taxes and urging citizens onward to more consumption. Bacevich quotes President Bush: "I encourage you all to go shopping more." After 9/11, Bacevich writes, "most Americans subscribed to a limited-liability version of patriotism, one that emphasized the display of bumper stickers in preference to shouldering a rucksack." Bacevich's political crisis involves more than just George W. Bush's failed presidency, though "his policies have done untold damage." Bacevich argues that the government the Founders envisaged no longer exists, replaced by an imperial presidency and a passive, incompetent Congress. "No one today seriously believes that the actions of the legislative branch are informed by a collective determination to promote the common good," he writes. "The chief . . . function of Congress is to ensure the reelection of its members." In Bacevich's view, the modern American government is dominated by an "ideology of national security" that perverts the Constitution and common sense. It is based on presumptions about the universal appeal of democracy and America's role as democracy's great defender and promoter that just aren't true. And we ignore the ideology whenever it suits the government of the day, by supporting anti-democratic tyrants in important countries like Pakistan and Egypt, for example. The ideology "imposes no specific obligations" nor "mandates action in support of the ideals it celebrates," but can be used by an American president "to legitimate the exercise of American power." Today politicians of all persuasions embrace this ideology. Bacevich quotes Sen. Barack Obama echoing "the Washington consensus" in a campaign speech that defined America's purposes "in cosmic terms" by endorsing a U.S. commitment to "the security and well-being of those who live beyond our borders" regardless of the circumstances. Bacevich describes the military crisis with an insider's authority. He dissects an American military doctrine that wildly overstates the utility of armed force in politically delicate situations. He decries the mediocrity of America's four-star generals, with particular scorn for Gen. Tommy Franks, original commander of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He calls the all-volunteer Army, isolated from the society it is supposed to protect, "an imperial constabulary" that "has become an extension of the imperial presidency." The heart of the matter, Bacevich argues, is that war can never be considered a useful political tool, because wars invariably produce unintended consequences: "War's essential nature is fixed, permanent, intractable, and irrepressible. War's constant companions are uncertainty and risk." New inventions cannot alter these facts, Bacevich writes. "Any notion that innovative techniques and new technologies will subject war to definitive human direction is simply whimsical," he writes, quoting Churchill approvingly: "The statesman who yields to war fever is no longer the master of policy, but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events." Yet the United States is today engaged in multiple wars that both exceed the capacity of the all-volunteer force and are highly unlikely to achieve their political aims, Bacevich argues. War is not the answer to the challenges we face, he says, and "to persist in following that path is to invite inevitable overextension, bankruptcy and ruin." The Limits of Power is a dense book but gracefully written and easy to read. It is chockablock with provocative ideas and stern judgments. Bacevich's brand of intellectual assuredness is rare in today's public debates. Many of our talking heads and commentators are cocksure, of course, but few combine confidence with knowledge and deep thought the way Bacevich does here. Some of Bacevich's asides, however, are highly debatable -- that Richard M. Nixon and Mao Tse-tung together helped bring down the Soviet empire, for example. Bacevich is no globalist, and he treats trade as a sign of national weakness. One could provide a long list of objections of this kind, but quibbles cannot undermine Bacevich's big argument, which is elegant and powerful. The end of the Cold War left the United States feeling omnipotent but without a utilitarian doctrine to guide its foreign policy. Instead, we have succumbed, again and again, to the military temptation. In Iraq we stumbled into a real disaster. If we cannot get our goals and our means into balance soon, our future will be a lot less fun than our past. Bacevich is argumentative, and his case is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but at the end of this book, a serious reader has a difficult choice: to embrace Bacevich's general view or to construct a genuinely persuasive alternative. For many years our leaders have failed to do either. The price of their failure has been high and could go much higher. Bacevich knows a lot about the costs himself; his only son, Andrew John Bacevich, a first lieutenant in the Army, was killed in Iraq last year. Candidates for office owe the voters their take on the big argument here: Do they think military power remains a tool of choice to help the United States make its way through the perils of the modern world? If so, can they explain why? Copyright 2008, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved." The second book I'll suggest is by that name anathema to all God-fearing right wingers, Thomas Friedman. Friedman, of course, has won three Pulitzer Prizes, has credentials in Middle East Poltics and Finance, and has undoubtedly spent more time in the Middle East than most of our leaders. I personally don't like the title of this book: "Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution--and How It Can Renew America." Nothing is more certain to raise the hackles of the knee-jerk right than the word "Green". Still, Friedman addresses more than a few of our contemporary ills, and offers solutions that others have successfully used. Here's the publisher's blurb: "Thomas L. Friedman’s phenomenal number-one bestseller The World Is Flat has helped millions of readers to see the world in a new way. In his brilliant, essential new book, Friedman takes a fresh and provocative look at two of the biggest challenges we face today: America’s surprising loss of focus and national purpose since 9/11; and the global environmental crisis, which is affecting everything from food to fuel to forests. In this groundbreaking account of where we stand now, he shows us how the solutions to these two big problems are linked--how we can restore the world and revive America at the same time. Friedman explains how global warming, rapidly growing populations, and the astonishing expansion of the world’s middle class through globalization have produced a planet that is “hot, flat, and crowded.” Already the earth is being affected in ways that threaten to make it dangerously unstable. In just a few years, it will be too late to fix things--unless the United States steps up now and takes the lead in a worldwide effort to replace our wasteful, inefficient energy practices with a strategy for clean energy, energy efficiency, and conservation that Friedman calls Code Green. This is a great challenge, Friedman explains, but also a great opportunity, and one that America cannot afford to miss. Not only is American leadership the key to the healing of the earth; it is also our best strategy for the renewal of America. In vivid, entertaining chapters, Friedman makes it clear that the green revolution we need is like no revolution the world has seen. It will be the biggest innovation project in American history; it will be hard, not easy; and it will change everything from what you put into your car to what you see on your electric bill. But the payoff for America will be more than just cleaner air. It will inspire Americans to something we haven’t seen in a long time--nation-building in America--by summoning the intelligence, creativity, boldness, and concern for the common good that are our nation’s greatest natural resources. Hot, Flat, and Crowded is classic Thomas L. Friedman: fearless, incisive, forward-looking, and rich in surprising common sense about the challenge--and the promise--of the future." I believe both of these books can contribute the kind of wisdom we need to address our current, seemingly overwhelming problems.

Right on Karl and Dr.Hess. The risk/reward ratio is way out of balance. There's nothing to be gained. flaco

Okay, it's true: I've gone to the dark side. I've been shooting 600 yards off the bench every chance I get this summer. About once a month. Being selfish--and divorced, no more wife to buy me presents--I got myself a target rifle for my 60th--Yikes!!!--birthday. It's 6.5x47 Lapua, a relatively new chambering. It's a sweet cartridge, and one that will probably feed in a Mauser, although my rifle is a single shot, no ejector, with one of those heavy barrels I thought I'd never have. Anyway, I've been shooting monthly matches since June. A nice group of guys, all helpful. And I've been frustrated. I wasn't getting the results I wanted. Finally, I took Wednesday morning off--our boss is a shooter, too, so he sanctions shooting holidays--and met a veteran at the range. He gave me some good advice concerning mechanics: bags, technique, etc. I had a load I liked, but wasn't certain on seating depth. (As an aside, when our shop fits a barrel, we cut a dummy chamber in a barrel stub. This allows very accurate bullet seating.) Turned out, my rifle likes this particular load with the bullet seated at the lands. Results? Best group, five rounds 2.2" at 600 yards. I know this isn't even close to big guys. But I was very pleased. flaco

Spiris has it right- Try many different kinds of ammo and pick the one your rifle likes. Or... You could PM me, and I'm certain my boss would be happy to sell you a smallbore target rifle. We have used CM-2s, new CM-2s, and a new shipment of Izhmash Biathlon Basic 7-2s in .22 WMR. I think you'd like this rifle, Karl. It's not really a Biathlon--no harness, no bunch of magazines hanging from the stock--but it's an accurate toggle action--quick, quick, quick--with a a hammer forged barrel. It even comes with a scope rail for your tired old eyes. Not to mention, the WMR will buck the wind a little better than the .22LR. If you're looking for something more accurate, we have many many BSA Martinis--including Models 12, 12/15, 15, and all the BSA Internationals from MKs I-II, through the MK V. These are pretty, and fun, but they're serious match rifles. Or, we have a pretty full line of Anschuetz target rifles. We were putting together a used 1907 today. These cost about four times what I paid for that VW Wabbit I drove for all those years. Given our history, karl, I don't at all expect to sell you a rifle. Although I think we have more than a few that you'd enjoy. And... I thought of you plenty this summer. An old friend of my boss helped out in the shop for the last three months. He shot Camp Perry for the Corps--although they had some issues, he was a little salty--and you'll find his name on the Marine Cup, the list of National Smallbore Champions, the Army Cup, and a few others. I know, I know... it's hard to imagine liberal old flaco working side-by-side with a Marine. Or shooting with him at the range? In general... we had a blast. The bad news is... I may have built my last Mauser. I love these rifles, and always will, but it seems I'm going to have to sell off a few to pay for my newest rifle, a 6.5x47 Lapua. I've been shooting 600 yards, and I've caught the bug. I'm not yet a hunter--although I'd like to try some ground squirrels--but I enjoy banging away in the early morning still with guys who like a challenge. These are not pretty rifles, in the sense of a beautiful Mauser by z1r, for instance. They're big, and clunky, and we spend way too much time in load development. I don't think I have any particular talent, in the sense of the Marine I worked with this summer. I just like it. And have had the benefit of a brief education, part of which took place here. I feel very lucky. I have a passion. If you're so inclined--it's not easy, and takes some commitment--I think we have clients in your area. Guys are shooting serious long range at Coalinga, and a little farther south at Cuyama. Anyway... I thought it was about time I mentioned how much I've enjoyed our repartee. I'm convinced you're irredeemable. And George W. Bush will leave our nation in such dire straits that criticizing him would be like shooting ducks in a barrel. With no choke. In as much sincerity as one may muster, flaco N.B. LOL!

Sheesh- You guys have been pissed at Gore ever since he invented the internet. Out here in California we've seen the results of poisoning ourselves with car exhaust. It's not pretty. And it's hard to breathe. That's why we insist on pollution control on cars. Now... I guess it's common knowledge that I'm old enough that global warming won't be the kind of issue to me it will to younger folks. Although I do find it interesting that there's now a Northwest Passage that a bunch of explorers died searching for. Anyway, do what you will. I invite you to continue driving SUVs and pickups with gas guzzling V8s. I'm only a little puzzled that Gentlemen who understand all too well the consequences of putting just a few too many grains of powder in a cartridge case insist on believing that human actions can't poison the climate. flaco

Any of you guys been following Senator Jim Webb? I knew nothing about him--until Terry Gross interviewed him on NPR--and it turns out there's a lot to like. From my point of view. And hell, even Karl can't complain. Webb's a Marine Corps veteran with Swift-Boat-Proof credentials. flaco

Glad to be of help, Don- They're sweet little rifles, and nice to look at, too. Well done. flaco