Brew's Unreal Pad

I have been going through all of my old email to find funny pictures and jokes I got while I was in the Middle East.  Attached is one of my favorites.

This was a fun trip.  Last week, I had two days off of work--I really needed a break--so I took 30 minutes to shoot at the indoor range outside of Fort Meade, Maryland, while I waited for my dog to get done at the groomer's.  It had been over a year since I had touched a weapon.  It is one of those things I miss about the Army, but I don't think about it often.  When I held the weapon, I was able to recall sleeping with my 9mm in Kosovo.  Not that sleeping with my weapon was especialy fun, it just took me back to a different point in my life.  There are things I miss and many I don't, but I loved my time in Kosovo.

 

Anyway, my wife had been bugging me about taking her to the range for some time.  She wanted to know what was like to fire a gun.  She is originally from Korea where guns are outlawed, and Koreans don't have much of a gun culture like we have in the U.S.  I took her on Saturday before we went grocery shopping.  At first, she was excited.  When we actually put on the hearing and eye protection and walked into the range, she was very scared.  She jumped with every bang of the other guns.  The place was packed by people packing.  There were other women, which made her a little happier and at ease. 

 

We had a Walther P22.  I didn't want her to have a lot of kick.  I would be mean if I had tried to get her to fire a .45 caliber.  She weighs 110lbs.  That would have set her back on her rear end or broken her wrist from the kick.  She took a lot of time between each shot, but she dd well.  When we pulled her target down, we noticed that every round landed where it should.  She didn't have a bad shot group, and she was even wearing her contact lenses.  We were only 25 feet from the target, but I don't think she will ever need to fire a handgun from a shorter distance. 

 

After she feels comfortable, and I feel comfortable with a gun in her hand, we might get one for the house.  My only problem is Maryland.  The laws here are messed up.  It you cannot carry in this state.  You must keep it locked in your trunk.  Magazines and rounds must be in the trunk, but the magazines cannot even be loaded.  The only time you can have a weapon in your trunk, however, is when you are transporting the weapon to the range or home from the range, and you need to be on the most direct route to or from your house!  Don't stop for milk.  Communist as the Democrat-controlled state is, you can only imagine my amazement when I saw the shotguns in the store with pistol grips.  In Indiana, pistol grips are illegal.  Maryland, however, allows 16-inch shotguns with pistol grips.  Note: you can easily hide these in a coat.  No one should wonder that there is a murder problem in Baltimore.  They can have these kinds of shotguns, but I cannot keep a .22 in my glove box.  Maybe, in four more years, when the people of Baltimore are able to correct their decision on their Mayor, they will elect someone who will admit there is a murder problem in Baltimore.  Then, we can work on the state-wide elections.  We need to start small with a grassroots effort to show how freedom and capitalism work.  This state will only get worse if we don't.

I am a junkie of all things political, so I finally start to write about political matters.  I will attempt to stay objective as possible; however, restraining my disgust of certain candidates will be most difficult.  CNN started this debate hoping for an explosion of attacks between Hillary Clinton and everyone else on that stage.  While Senator Obama gave her a little tap and Senator Edwards attempted a jab, no one landed a good right hook.  She needs a right hook.  Then, to my surprise, Senators Obama and Edwards stumbled over a yes-or-no question on drivers' licenses for "illegal" aliens.  They let down their guards.  It was just sorry.

 

Did anyone else notice how soft the questions were from Campbell?  Campbell smiled with lustful eyes everytime she questioned Mrs. Clinton.  Wolf didn't hold back with his questions of her, but he did seem to want to squash criticism of Clinton from the other candidates.  My only complaint for Wolf is how he brought Senator Biden to the stage.  He said it with so little enthusiasm, almost like he forgot him.  It was an "oh yea, you" moment.

 

Did anyone notice Lou Dobbs poke fun at "fair and balanced" about 15 minutes before the debate began?  I hate it when the different networks speak ill of each other.  Just so no one believes I stick to only one news channel over another, let me illustrate my TV viewing schedule:  At 7:00 PM, I watch Hardball.  At 8:00, I watch the Daily Show then the Colbert Report.  At 9:00, I watch Hannity and Colmes.  Then I watch Anderson Cooper 360.  At 11:00, I go back to O'Reilly on Fox.  Lastly, at midnight, I turn it back to MSNBC to watch Keith Oberman.  I watch the news channels for six hours a night, but only one hour of that is with a real journalist.  For those of you not following, the only journalist is Anderson Cooper even though you can easily see some of his left-leaning views. 

 

The only good attacks tonight were by Dennis Kucinich.  He didn't direct the best ones at any one person; he directed them at all of them collectively.  He pointed out how almost everyone of them changed positions on issues because of political expedience.  I was waiting for someone to lick a finger, stick it in the air, and change positions during the debate; but, the cameras didn't show it.  I loved how he got all over those in Congress on the Patriot Act.  He said that he didn't vote for the Patriot Act because he "read it."  By implying that the others didn't read it, he highlighted the truth about those in Congress.  Staffers, not the politicians, write most of the bills.  Some of the politicians read it, but most do not.  His criticisms of the Congress are spot-on. 

 

Mrs. Clinton's campaign---I don't want to insinuate that she knew of this before Wolf asked his questions---made the smartest political play in this debate.  There must have been a concerted effort by her camp to get her supporters to outright boo Obama and Edwards when they began to criticize Mrs. Clinton.  CNN did a poor job of controlling inapropriate behaviour by those in the audience.  There were hecklers at the very begining jumping on Senator Obama to which CNN took too long to control, and to the discredit of Mrs. Clinton and the other candidates, no one else told them to shut their pie holes. 

 

I really don't like anyone of the Democrat candidates yet.  Obama has a wonderful personality.  On the "who would you like to drink a beer with test", he has my vote, but his policies suck like an Oreck.  Kucinich is the only one who can possibly go to bed at night believing he didn't screw anyone over that day.  He is one of the most plain-spoken men to walk across the stage.  He doesn't change his vote on the direction of the political winds.  His votes are just screwy.  His is the Democrats Ron Paul.  Ron is a great guy too.  Don't get me wrong.  I just believe, however, that Ron needs a tin foil hat sometimes.  Biden is a straight-shooter too, but he (to use one of Bill O'Reilly's overused terms) bloviates far too much.  I think he got the word finally.  He made a couple of jokes about it.  In addition, I don't like his plan to divide Iraq into three pieces.  Balkanizing didn't work that well for the Balkans.  Don't believe me?  We still have troops there too.  Dodd actaully beat him on the question about Pakistan.  We cannot be too hard on President Musharref if you aren't politically willing or capable of backing up your threats.  Diplomacy is speaking loudly and having no stick.  I say we need to end all discussions and grab sticks that fire bullets.  I don't think we need to attack Musharref or support him.  We need to do like we do everywhere else, and others would do too if they could, and just use him for our own interests.  National security trumps human rights.  I don't like it that way, but that is the reality.  Self-preservation is paramount. 

 

I just don't trust Edwards, Clinton, or Dodd.  What they say and do contradict each other too often.  They seem to be too patronizing.  If, as a voter, I pass gas in your presence, don't smile and tell me how wonderful it smells because you don't want to offend me.  If I pass gas, it was probably a loud and clear statement as to how I feel about your presence.  Clinton, Obama, and Edwards seemed to be in a fight at the beginning on who could give us the most Government at the begining.  After the beginning exchange between Clinton and Obama, I thought one was going to say, "My dad can beat up your dad."  They cannot even criticize each other without looking like they are pandering to each other.

 

Lastly, Mrs. Clinton needs a new laugh.  That laugh is painful to my ears.  I would pay to never hear it again.  Do you notice she does it everytime someone criticizes her?  If you cannot take the knocks with a straight face, leave.  Laughing at the criticism belittles those who are affected by her lack of judgement.  When someone like Kucinich says that she is responsible for her vote for the war, she needs to own up to it.  She is challenging Bush to be President.  Does she not know that he is not running?  She voted along with Bush on so many issues.  Is she a sheep?  I am not saying that the President's votes were wrong, I am just saying that she voted with him when the polls supported it.  She wants committees to solve issues.  Sorry.  I work where people like to use panels and committees.  Most of them are so old that their charters are on yellow paper.  They don't accomplish anything.  Management by committee does not work.  If she wins, I will buy all of the ice I can hold in my house.  It will be hell on Earth, and I will need to keep cool somehow.

I am working on a style guide for work.  The U.S. Government Printing Office is my primary source for this book.  The task proves to be more daunting than I originally expected.   

 

So far, I have written on the parts of speech and many of the different punctuation marks.  Writing about tone and political correctness will be more difficult.  I feel compelled to write the book in second person, but I do not want the reader to become emotional because I am directing the reader to change bad habits that are engrained.  Most of the time, the reader will not even know that it is a bad habit.  If I write the book completely in passive voice, it will sound more like other books; but, one of my primary objectives is to get the reader to think and write in active voice.  Passive voice is really poor for effective communication.  It might sound more eloquent in certain situations, but I like to stick to the facts.  Just give out the information the reader needs.  Everything else is fluff.

 

This project will only get more difficult now that I am taking classes after work.  My rear will hurt from sitting in front of a PC for so long.