RANDOM SHOTS - Is Fox News Turning Left? Liberal Media Throws Up Diversions, and More!

FIRST SHOT!

So is FOX NEWS turning Left?

Fox News shakes up their line-up of Political Contributors, and seems to be pulling away from their conservative viewer-base who look to them for equal time in a media full of leftist reporting.

Fox News let go conservative icon Sarah Palin, a great woman who has become a voice of the American people since her 2008 debut into the world of national politics.

Then Fox News let go the very knowledgeable Dick Morris, who though helped Bill Clinton become President in the 1990s has become pretty conservative since the World Trade Center 9/11 terrorist attack.

And who does Fox News add in their place? Fox has added ultra-liberal Dennis Kucinich, and believe it or not Massachusetts RINO (Republican In Name Only) Scott Brown.

That's right! Fox News Channel is hiring former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown as a Political Contributor. And believe it or not, the RINO is making his debut in prime time tonight.

So why hire someone with little to no political experience? Who the hell knows!

Brown is supposedly a member of the Republican Party, and faced the Democratic candidate, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, in the 2010 special election to succeed U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy for the remainder of the term ending January 3, 2013.

Brown ran for a full senate term in 2012, but lost to Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren. He subsequently joined the board of directors of Kadant paper company and is in talks to join Fox News as a commentator.

So why would I, and many others consider Scott Brown a RINO (Republican In Name Only)?

It's easy, it's because he has demonstrated himself to be just that.

Following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last December, Scott Brown became the first Republican Senator to support a Federal Ban on so-called assault weapons.

And back in 2010, after entering the US Senate, RINO Scott Brown joined in on the effort to pass a Democrat Party "jobs bill" - in fact, praising Democrats Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senator John Kerry. 

Brown was only one of five Republican senators to vote for cloture on the jobs bill. The motion passed in the Senate 62–30 on February 22, 2010. In an up or down vote on the bill itself on February 24, 2010, Brown voted for final passage, helping to pass the bill 70–28.

Brown's defeat in the 2012 U.S Senate race was no surprise since many conservatives in Massachusetts believe that Brown betrayed them once elected the first time.

So now Fox News says that Scott Brown will offer commentary across several programs, starting with Sean Hannity on Wednesday.

Brown lost his seat to Elizabeth Warren in November and declined to run in a special election to fill the Senate seat vacated by now-Secretary of State John Kerry. Probably because he'd get beaten again.

Fox has been remaking its contributor lineup in recent months. Cutting ties to Sarah Palin and Dick Morris while hiring ultra-liberal Dennis Kucinich and RINO Scott Brown, may ultimately hurt the station that I depend on for television News.

I'm just hoping that Fox News is not pulling away from its conservative base and turning to the left to become another MSNBC.

If it does, it will lose it's number one place in the news.

NEXT SHOT!

NRA's New Ad

The NRA unveiled a new online ad on Tuesday night that adopts a kinder, gentler tone than its last campaign, which drew criticism from all sides for highlighting the security surrounding President Barack Obama’s daughters.

The new commercial, which is narrated by Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, rather than executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, who spearheaded the last effort, cites the administration’s own research to take down its gun proposals.

The ad’s debut coincided with President Obama’s State of the Union address, in which he made emotional introductions for several victims of gun violence who were in the audience and said they deserved a vote on the issue.

Showing an internal Justice Department memo, the new ad highlights statements saying that an assault weapons ban is unlikely to affect gun violence without buybacks of those weapons already in the hands of the public. Another document suggests that universal background checks wouldn’t work without gun registration.

Gone is the rhetoric of the last ad, which concluded with the question, “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” That was widely seen as detracting from the NRA’s message at a time when it was on the defensive after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in which 20 first-graders were killed.

Even veteran NRA lobbyist James Baker disagreed with the tone of that commercial, telling Reuters it was “ill-advised.”

The new ad ends with the words “mandatory gun confiscation” and “requiring national gun registration” in bold on a plain background before Cox returns to ask, “Still think President Obama’s proposals sound reasonable?”

The ad will appear on websites visited frequently by people in South Dakota, Colorado, Louisiana, Arkansas and Alaska, all of which have Democratic senators facing mid-term elections in 2014.

NEXT SHOT!

Why is the Department of Homeland Security buying so many bullets?

The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. Those sorts of numbers are roughly the equivalent of 5 bullets for every person in the United States 

It says it needs them, all of them for law enforcement agents in training and on duty.
The government's explanation is much less sinister then conspiracy theorists saying that our government is "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars."

Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia.

The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.

Miss Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities.

The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella.

The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year.

The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency.

ICE's ammunition requests in the last year included:
--450 million rounds of .40-caliber duty ammunition
--40 million rounds of rifle ammunition a year for as many as five years, for a total bullet-buy of 200 million rounds
--176,000 rifle rounds on a separate contract
--25,000 blank rounds

The Homeland Security ammo buy is not the first time the government's bullets purchases have sparked concerns among conspiracy theorists. The same thing took place in 2012, last year, when the Social Security Administration posted a notice that it was buying 174,000 hollow point bullets.

NEXT SHOT!

Study finds Smoking Marijuana linked to Higher Risk of Stroke

Many who support the legalization of marijuana often tout the drug’s benign side effects, asserting that long-term marijuana use has no lasting impact on an individual’s health.

However, many studies have surfaced that shed doubt on this claim.

Recent research from Duke University in Durham, N.C., found that smoking marijuana habitually during their adolescence showed a decrease in their general intellectual ability as they progressed into adulthood.

But than again, dumb might be in? Look who they supported as president.

And now, now there is an even more chilling possible side effect of cannabis use – an increased risk of stroke.

According to a new study from the University of Auckland in New Zealand, marijuana may double the risk of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) – even those who had no risk factors that often contribute to an attack.

LAST SHOT!

Liberal Media Throws Up Diversions

Senator Rubio vs The Liberal News Media

MSNBC, NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, all liberal news outlets. All having a great time being critical with Senator Marco Rubio for taking a drink of water while giving the Republican rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union speech.

One idiot actually in CNN announced their Senator Rubio segment - a discussion on his taking a drink of water no less - by asking if his water-swig is a "career ender".

No kidding! Imagine the idiot that came up with that one. Imagine his throwing out the idea of running a whole segment, a discussion, a news report, breaking news, on a Senator taking a drink of water during a speech?

Imagine for a moment what they were really doing here. And yes, ask yourself, where's the beef? Where's the substance to their angst with Senator Rubio as to what he said?

Folks, I watched it and I can't tell you where they find problems with Sen. Rubio's speech. They did not talk about his rebuttal or any of the "specifics" that Senator Rubio addressed.

The only thing that they could come up with was that Senator Rubio stopped his rebuttal to take a drink of water. Horrifying as that might be to the liberal left, it just shows their impotency to articulate what they don't agree with - as well as their determination to divert the converation away from real concerns.

The liberal left, the liberal news media, simply can't bring anything to the table, they have no game, they are weak, they want to distract people from the real issues, they cannot refute what was being said so they talk about crap like a drink of water.

I just don't know how else to say it. The liberal news media, MSNBC and CNN being the worse of the bunch, throw distraction after distraction to steer the discussion away from what needs to be talked about.

They talk about this Republican saying this and that Conservative doing that, but they don't address the problems and concerns that Americans are really worried about. 

• Out of control government spending,
• unemployment highest it has been in years,
• gasoline is at or above $4 a gallon,
• everyone is getting more taxes taken out of the paychecks,
• rising taxes across the board, 
• more small businesses are shutting down than ever before,
• big businesses are not hiring or relocating,
• home foreclosures are at an all time high because people are out of work,
• manufacturing jobs are being sent overseas because the liberals wanted to make "their lives" better,
• more Americans are on food stamps than ever,
• more Americans are below the poverty line under President Obama than any other president in our entire history,
• more government intrusion in the lives of Americans,
• the fact that a majority of Americans feel threatened by the U.S. government more than ever before,
• Americans losing hope  --

and all the jokers like Chris Matthews and the other assholes in the liberal media want to talk about is Senator Rubio taking a swig of bottled water. Imagine that!

We have a president that does not want water-boarding of terrorists even if it means saving American lives, but he sees no problem in ordering a drone missile strike to kill unarmed Americans overseas if they are merely "suspected" of working with a terrorist network..

We have a president that wants to ban guns and limit the sale of ammunition, even for reloading which no criminal does, because he is worried about saving the life of "just one child," but at the same time he is for late term abortion of children -- those who are about to be born.

And yes, Democrats feel that abortion is OK even though they have sanctioned the death of over 45 Million children over the last 40 years -- all while saying that they are worried about "the children."

They want to stop Global Warming even though it doesn't exist, because they say they are worried about the children. They wan a gun ban, because they say they are worried about the children. they want to stop people from Smoking cigarettes, because they say they are worried about "the children."

All, all, while never saying that they want to prevent or slow down the rising rate of abortions in this country.

Why? Because they are NOT worried about "those children."

Did Senator Rubio taking a drink of water on camera seem a little awkward? Sure.

Did anyone at home watching it think it was as big a deal as prissy jerkweeds like Chris Matthews did? Probably not. The reason is that the people had home have bigger concerns. 

As for it being a "career-ender?"  Well, believe it or not, that's the question CNN posed regarding Sen. Marco Rubio's water-swig during his response to the State of the Union Tuesday night.

No, they did not take that time to talk about the out of control cost of ObamaCare, the problems with illegal aliens committing crime in America, voter fraud like that that takes place in Chicago and Philadelphia, the issue of our having to show an ID to turn in recycling - yet not to vote, the horrible security of our schools, teacher sex crimes, gay clergy abusing children, and runaway cost of living.

No, to them, it is more important to devote a segment examining whether the a drink of water could squelch Senator Rubio's rising political career.

"Can a drink of water make or break a political career?" Wolf Blitzer asked. "A U.S. senator, possible presidential candidate. We're going to find out, whether he likes it or not."

As a clip of the swig aired, the graphic on the screen then said: "Career-Ender?"

Imagine the insanity here! The guy took a drink of water!

Later, CNN tried to say that they were just teasing and defended the graphic saying it was just a joke.

"It was simply a tease (posing a question) leading up to a segment with our political contributors -- when Wolf specifically said no one thinks this will be a career-ender," a CNN spokeswoman told FoxNews.com.

During a panel discussion, Blitzer asserted Rubio's got a "huge future ahead of him." CNN analyst Cornell Belcher, though, claimed the night would haunt him through his career.

"He goes in stylistically, he's sweating like Nixon. He goes for the water in a really awkward way which will, quite frankly, be what's most remembered from this," Belcher said. "Style matters. And he fumbled."

CNN wasn't the only outlet to find the drink of water exceedingly newsworthy.

Not surprisingly MSNBC replayed the clip roughly 155 times. The play was indicative of how some outlets tried to turn the awkward moment into something more significant.
"The Rachel Maddow Show" played a loop of the swig over and over again Wednesday night. Host Al Sharpton even took a drink from a gigantic Poland Spring jug, just to hammer home the mocking.

That's fine, it's great when they can joke and mock someone when they should have been focused on what Senator Rubio had to say in his rebuttal.

This is a one way street. They don't want to talk about the issues when they really want to distract and steer the discussion away from the big problems we face.

If they don't want to take a serious look at the problems and face, then that's up to them. If they are really too busy defending a Democrat President and fill their time by distracting their viewers away from the real issues, then why should anyone take them serious about anything?

And by the way, if they really want something funny - they should look to Obama!

Story by Tom Correa

A Great Ranch Rifle: The Marlin Model 336

So what's my idea of a great ranch rifle?

Well, I believe a ranch rifle is any rifle of sufficient power that it can be used to bring down game, both big and small. Lever-action rifles are probably the most common "ranch guns," also known as "truck guns" and "ranch rifles," out there.

Sure there are those out there who are going to write to me. I can just imagine the amount of e-mail that I'll get from well-meaning folks out there wanting to "educate me" on the superior attributes of the Ruger Mini-14, the SKS, the AR-15, and a host of other rifles.

It is more likely than not that I will be told about how the Ruger Mini-14, Mini Thirty, and Mini-6.8 are all small, lightweight semi-automatic carbines built by one of my favorite U.S. firearm manufacturers, Sturm Ruger.

The Ruger Mini-14 can fire both the .223 Remington cartridge and the similar military 5.56x45mm cartridge. The target model Mini-14 rifles are chambered only for the .223 Remington cartridge. The Mini Thirty uses the 7.62×39mm, and the Mini-6.8 fires 6.8 mm Remington SPC. Of course, being semi-automatic, they can handle 5, 10, 20, or 30 round factory box magazine. Numerous aftermarket magazines and drum mags, believe it or not.

In 2008, Ruger began marking many Mini-14 rifles as "RANCH RIFLE" instead of Mini-14 on the receiver.

Why, you ask? Well, these rifles are the most basic models. They generally come in a wood rifle stock and features an 18.5" tapered barrel - although some are available with a 16" barrel. These rifles feature an adjustable ghost ring rear sight and winged front sight. They are sold with a 20 round detachable magazine. However, in some states like California, where high capacity magazines are illegal, they are sold with 5 round magazines instead.

The Ruger "Ranch Rifle" variant has scope bases integrated into the receiver and an ejector that ejects the spent cartridge case at a lower angle to avoid hitting a low-mounted scope. The old original Ruger "Ranch Rifle" rear sight was a folding-type aperture, which would fit under a scope, and lacked a winged front sight. This model will chamber both .223 Remington and 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition.

So now you're asking, what's wrong with the Ruger -- after all, it sounds like a great rifle?

Yes, it is a great rifle! While a Ruger Mini-14, like an AR-15 or an SKS, obviously has higher capacity and removable mags, for a Ranch Rifle, I think that it comes down to a matter of taste like most things, preference, and practicality.

If it were a simple matter of choosing a home defense or self-defense weapon, I would prefer a pistol or shotgun for close-quarters defense and a semi-automatic rifle for longer ranges. Because I see a "Ranch Rifle" as more of a "Livestock and Game Rifle" that can also be used as a self-defense weapon, I prefer a lever-action rifle .44 magnum or the heftier .30-30 Winchester cartridge.

Since being involved with Cowboy Action Shooting, I've seen folks have problems with their pistol caliber lever-action rifles. Yes, parts do give out. But remember, most participating in Cowboy Action Shooting put thousands of rounds through their lever-action in a few months of competition. That's not the case for the average American.

I doubt if my Marlin 336 .30-30 has seen 500 rounds over the decades. Yet my 1894 Marlin chews up at least a few hundred rounds a month. That sort of wear and tear takes a toll on any piece of machinery, and after all, that's what a rifle is. Like all firearms, a rifle is a piece of machinery. It's a tool.

But unlike a semi-automatic rifle, which has a higher probability of something going wrong, lever-action rifles are less complicated and simply have less to go wrong. Simplicity is the ticket that makes lever actions reliable.

So let's talk ammo!

Ammunition is a concern. Since I don't foresee myself getting into a firefight with a rogue deer or terrorist mountain lion, I don't see needing more than a few rounds.

Also, round availability is a huge concern these days. While people are buying up the .223 supply because of fear of the government outlawing some rounds, .30-30 ammo is pretty much available anywhere. In fact, in my area that is definitely rural America, hardware stores always have .30-30 ammunition. And yes, I'm sure that's the way it is with the hardware stores in your part of rural America.

Since availability is a huge concern these days, I can testify from experience that I'd be more likely to find what my grandpa used to call a "common cartridge" such as a .30-30, .30-06., or .308, and .270 rounds for rifles, and .45 ACP, .44 Magnum, .357 Magnum, and .38 caliber rounds for pistols, than "exotic rounds."

More of what I call "exotic rounds," such as a 7.63x39 round for an AK or SKS, aren't usually available from local hardware stores. Not every hunter needs such a cartridge.

The two most popular rifles in the world, the Winchester Model 94 and the Marlin Model 336 are fast handling lever actions that are considered nearly perfect for woods and brush country hunting like we have around here. Both are chambered for the very effective .30-30 Winchester cartridge. Out to just over 200 yards, a .30-30 is all that is needed to bag most of the world's antlered game.

The .30-30 is a living legend and is certainly one of the most effective game cartridges ever designed. The .30-30 Winchester or .30 Winchester Center Fire cartridge was first marketed in early 1895 to be used in the Winchester Model 1894 lever-action rifle.

The .30-30, "thirty-thirty" as it is most commonly known, was the USA's first small-bore, sporting rifle cartridge designed for smokeless powder. Because it was chambered for the Winchester Model 1894 carbine and rifle, it was also known as .30 Winchester Centerfire or .30 WCF.

When the cartridge was chambered in the Marlin Model 1893 rifle, rival gunmaker John Marlin used the designation .30-30 or .30-30 Smokeless. The added -30 stands for the standard load of 30 grains (1.9 g) of early smokeless powder, according to late-19th century American naming conventions for black powder-filled cartridges.

Marlin and the Union Metallic Cartridge Company later dropped the Winchester appellation "WCF" on their rounds as they did not want to put the name of rival Winchester on their products.

The modern designation of .30-30 Winchester was arrived at by using Marlin's variation of the name with the Winchester name appended as the originator of the cartridge. However, the .30 WCF is still seen occasionally. This designation also served a purpose in avoiding a lot of confusion with the different yet similarly-shaped .30-40 Krag, which has been referred to as ".30 US" and ".30 Army".

The .30-30 is considered the "entry-class" for modern big-game hunting cartridges. It is common to define the characteristics of cartridges with similar ballistics as being in the ".30-30 class" when describing their trajectory. While it is very effective on deer and black bear-sized game, most commercial loads are limited in effective range to approximately 200 yards.

In Canada and the U.S., the cartridge has also been used on moose, caribou, and pronghorn. One source says that modern opinions in Canada on its suitability for moose are mixed. Yet, it appears many moose have been taken with the 30/30 to rule it out as good for this purpose as well.

In both Canada and the U.S., the .30-30 cartridge has a long history of use on moose. But at the same time, it is pretty much agreed that the .30-30 is not a good choice for hunters who wish to shoot animals at longer ranges.

The reason is that the cartridge, with its flat or round-nosed bullets, does not meet the minimum energy standards required for moose hunting in many places. In fact, while the .30-30 is legal for hunting moose in Newfoundland, Canada, game authorities do not recommend its use.

One of the primary reasons for the .30-30's popularity among deer hunters is its light recoil. Average recoil from a typical 150-grain in a 7.5-pound lever-action rifle is about half that of a comparable rifle chambered for the .30-06 Springfield.

Because most rifles chambered in .30-30 are lever-action rifles with tubular magazines, most .30-30 cartridges are loaded with round-nose or flat-nose bullets for safety.

What does this have to do with safety? Well, round-nose or flat-nose bullets prevent a spitzer-point bullet from setting off the primer of the cartridge ahead of it in the tube magazine during recoil, resulting in potentially catastrophic damage to both firearm and shooter.

When the Savage Model 99 was introduced in 1899, it came with a rotary magazine to avoid that issue. A notable exception to the "no pointed bullets" guideline for bullet selection in rifles with tubular magazines are the new flexible "memory elastomer"-tipped LEVER Evolution cartridges as produced by Hornady.

The soft rubber tips of these bullets easily deform under compression, preventing detonations while under recoil in the magazine, yet also return to their original pointed shape when that pressure is removed, thus allowing for a more efficient bullet shape than previously available to load safely in such rifles.

The more aerodynamic shape results in a flatter bullet trajectory and greater retained velocity downrange, significantly increasing the effective range of rifles chambered for this cartridge. Yes, the new type of round increases the hunter's range.

The .30-30 is by far the most common chambering in lever-action rifles such as the Winchester Model 1894, the Savage Model 99, and the Marlin Model 336. However, the .30-30 is by no means the only option left to someone who is in the market for a lever-action Ranch Rifle. Lever-action Ranch Rifles can be had in pistol calibers as well.

Marlin Model 336 Lever-Action Rifles

From my experience, among lever-action rifles out there, Marlin Firearms Company lever-action rifles simply can't be beaten. From deer to mountain lions, from wild hogs to bears, Marlin lever-action rifles have been proven successful for generations.

It all started with John M. Marlin. He was born in Connecticut in 1836 and served his apprenticeship as a tool and die-maker. During the Civil War, he worked at the Colt plant in Hartford, and in 1870 hung out his own sign on State Street, New Haven, to start manufacturing his own line of revolvers and derringers.

With an outstanding team of inventors, they developed breakthroughs and enduring models, such as the Model 1891 and 1893 rifles. Both were updated as Models 39 (.22 caliber) and Model 336 (.30-30 Win).

When using the word enduring, we should understand that these two models are the oldest sporting shoulder arm models still in current production by their original maker. In fact, the lever-action 22 repeater, which is now the Model 39, was the favorite of many exhibition shooters, including Annie Oakley. 

The Marlin Model of 1893, later designated the Marlin Model 36, was heavier than the Winchester 94, which was then the dominant lever-action hunting rifle. It also featured a semi-pistol grip wooden stock and solid top receiver with side-ejection, in contrast to the Winchester 94 carbine's straight grip stock and top-ejection receiver.

The Model 36 was updated as the Model 336 in 1948, continuing the main differences with the Winchester. The solid, flat top receiver and side ejection of the Model 336 allowed Marlin to sell to the growing number of American hunters who preferred optical sights over the traditional iron sights.

The Model 336 is a direct development of the Marlin Model 1893 rifle which was produced from 1893 to 1936.

In the mid-1950s, Marlin incorporated its proprietary Micro-Groove rifling system into the Model 336. Microgroove rifling with many shallow grooves was designed to work better with jacketed bullets than more traditional rifling with fewer but deeper grooves originally developed for use with lead bullets.

The design of the Marlin 336 allows the user to remove the lever pivot screw with a common screwdriver, allowing the removal of the lever, bolt, and ejector for maintenance. This design allows the user to clean the barrel from the breech, like a bolt action rifle, avoiding wear to the muzzle.

Disassembly of the Winchester 1894 usually requires the services of a gunsmith. Anyone who has tried to take apart a Winchester '94 realizes very quickly why they say a user seldom disassembles the rifle and usually cleans the barrel from the muzzle.

American black walnut pistol-grip stocks with fluted combs, cut checkering, rubber butt pads, and sling swivel studs. They also have adjustable, semi-buckhorn, folding rear sights and ramp front sights with brass beads and Wide-Scan™ hoods, which are standard features on a Marlin.

Their solid-top receivers are tapped for scope mounts. 20" barrels have 12-groove Micro-Groove® rifling.

The Model 336C

Marlin Model 336C

The Model 336C, this rifle is truly the flagship of Marlin's Model 336 family. This rifle is known for its rugged styling, pinpoint accuracy, ease of use, and incredible dependability. This popular "pistol-grip" or "Monte Carlo grip" carbine has a flat, solid-top receiver and hammer-block safety.

The 336C has become one of the most popular rifles in North America. In addition to .30/30 Win., the 336C is also available in .35 Rem., a cartridge favored by many hunters because of its reputation as a hard-hitting brush-buster.

The Model 336W

Marlin Model 336W

The Model 336W is a no-frills hunting machine. And yes, I love mine.

The Model 336W is chambered for 30-30 Win. and features a 20" Micro-Groove® barrel with adjustable rear and ramp with hood front sights. Plus, its receiver is drilled and tapped for scope mounts. The walnut-finished hardwood stock and fore-end have cut checkering and come with a padded nylon sling included. The rifle is also available with a factory-mounted and bore-sighted 3-9x32mm scope.



Among its other 336 models is the Model 336SS. This is a foul-weather rifle because foul weather won’t faze this stainless version of the field-proven Model 336 chambered in .30/30 and .308 win. Most of its major metal parts are machined from forged stainless steel. Others are nickel-plated.

Marlin has also made many of these lever-action rifles for mass marketers like Sears, Western Auto, K-Mart, and Wal-Mart. These models have walnut-stained hardwood stocks instead of American Walnut stocks and were sold for significantly lower prices than standard Model 336's.

Other than the less expensive wood, these rifles are mechanically identical to the Model 336. Many of these rifles were sold under the names Glenfield, Glenfield Marlin, or Marlin, as Models 30, 30A, 30AS, and 30AW. The Model 30AW package includes a gold-plated steel trigger, a 3-9x32 factory-mounted scope, a padded sling, and an offset hammer spur. It is identical to the current Marlin Model 336W. The new Model 336BL is a big-loop lever for faster, more efficient chambering and ejection with gloves on, plus striking laminated woodwork that improves weather resistance and adds aesthetic appeal.

Its 18½" barrel is handy in the brush, and the full-length magazine tube gives you six rounds of .30-30 Winchester assurance at the moment of truth.

The Model 1895

Marlin Model 1895

This is a great gun! And yes, I own one as well!

Introduced in 1972 and named in honor of the Marlin Model of 1895, which was produced from 1895 to 1917, the current Model 1895 rifle is based on the final design of the Model 336.

The difference is that it is enlarged and strengthened for more powerful, big bore cartridges. It was initially chambered in the .444 Marlin developed specifically for the new Model 1895, then in the traditional .45-70.



As for today's Marlin Model 1895 in .45-70, well, in my first-hand experience, my Marlin 1895 in .45-70 is a tried and true configuration of this famous 45–70 rifle. It features a 22" barrel with deep-cut Ballard-type rifling and an American black walnut pistol grip stock with cut checkering and swivel studs. The .45-70 was originally a black powder cartridge, and most factory ammo is loaded moderately for safety in older rifles, including the original Model of 1895 way back when.

Today is a different story. With increasing numbers of modern .45-70 rifles built with high strength actions - including the current Model 1895, the Ruger No. 1 single shot, the Browning BLR, or the Siamese Mauser conversions.

Reloaders and specialty ammunition makers like Hornady, Buffalo Bore, and Garrett produce high intensity big .45-70 loads that may equal or exceed the power of the .444 Marlin.

Some approach the power of the .458 Winchester Magnum and are effective against dangerous game up to and including elephants. Use of such loadings in older .45-70 firearms is dangerous and should not be attempted. For that reason, Marlin introduced the .450 Marlin, a belted version of the .45-70 cartridge that will not chamber in older .45-70 rifles.

Many .45-70 Model 1895 owners like myself chose to use the traditional .45-70 Government round for deer-sized game and elk. Of course, my Marlin Model 1895 gives me the option of using beefier .45-70 loads for the more dangerous game like the bear in Alaska.

For me, while the .45-70 Gov't is a traditional round that was once a US Cavalry issue used for everything from buffalo to attacking Indians, the big .450 Marlin is too much gun as a Ranch Rifle. Besides, most of us don't have problems with raging elephants.

One recent innovation growing in popularity is the Marlin 1895 "Guide Gun" concept. The name most probably originates from the types of long arms favored by Alaskan hunting and wilderness guides as a defense against attacks by bears.

The Guide Gun concept consists of a handy, short-barreled (usually 16-19") lever action in a large caliber such as .45-70 or .450 Marlin with a 3/4 length magazine tube. These guns are usually fitted with fast open sights such as ghost rings or express sights. Frequently these sights make use of tritium or fiber optics.

Marlin's Guide Guns are usually equipped with a scout rail allowing the mounting of optics such as long-eye relief scopes or parallax-free optics such as reflex sights or holographic weapon sights.

Marlin 1895 actions are popular bases for this type of firearm. Marlin itself offers the 1895G, 1895GS, and 1895SBL fitting this mold. Previously offered models such as the 1895SDT and 336SDT also fit the mold.

All have roots in the Model 336, so yes, without question, the Marlin Model 336 Series of lever-action rifles is the way to go when looking for a Ranch Rifle. 

The Marlin 336 is, without a doubt, one of the most popular hunting rifles in North America. Offered in one of America's favorite cartridges, the .30-30 embodies Marlin's dedication to dependability, pinpoint accuracy, good looks, and rugged reliability.

The Model 1894

Marlin Model 1894

In 1963, Marlin added the .44 Magnum cartridge as an optional chambering in the Model 336T carbine, which featured a straight grip, a 20-inch round tapered barrel and a full-length magazine. However, the rifle experienced continuing problems in loading and chambering the short .44 Magnum cartridge, so in 1964 Marlin abruptly dropped the .44 Magnum option.

Marlin was well aware of the continued demand for a lever-action carbine in .44 Magnum and began searching for a replacement. Then in 1969, Marlin introduced the New Model 1894 in .44 Magnum/.44 Special.

Now, let's clear up something one reader wanted me to clarify, the New Model 1894 is not based on the Model 336 mechanism. That is, instead, it uses the old short-receiver Model 1894 action incorporating the flat-profile bolt, which received minor improvements before being reintroduced in .44 Magnum caliber. The decision to use the original Model 1894 action, a design originally designed to accommodate pistol-length cartridges such as the .38-40 and .44-40, proved a complete success.

For me, I have owned a few Marlin lever-action rifles in my time. I absolutely love the feel and balance of my Marlin Model 1894 in .45 long colt, which I use for Cowboy Action Shooting.

For those who think the .45 long colt cartridge is gone the way of the dinosaur, folks should know that the .45 long colt remains in use 140 years after its introduction.



Besides in sport shooting like Cowboy Action Shooting, it is still used as a hunting load on animals the size of deer and black bear. Of course, depending on the load, heavier loads will take the same range of big game animals as the .44 Magnum. The short action rifle is the part of the design based on the Model 336.

The Model 1894 is chambered in rimmed calibers commonly associated with revolvers such as the .38 Special/.357 Magnum, the .44 Special/.44 Magnum, and the .45 Colt.

This model is popular with Cowboy Action Shooters, as well as ranchers in rural areas where carrying a lever gun and a revolver in the same caliber is pretty common. The concept of a dual-purpose handgun/rifle cartridge has been popular since the Old West, with cartridges like the .44-40 Winchester, whose "High-Speed" rifle loads were precursor magnum loads. 

Some past dual-purpose cartridges, like the .44-40 Winchester, gave their manufacturers trouble when people loaded the "High-Speed" versions designed for rifles into handguns. Since the .44 Magnum was designed from the start as a revolver cartridge, such issues are moot, and SAAMI-compliant ammunition should fire from any handguns or rifles chambered for the .44 Magnum.

As a lever-action rifle or carbine cartridge, the .44 Magnum is sufficiently powerful for medium-sized game yet fits easily into a compact, lightweight package. As with the Marlin Model 1894, with significantly longer barrels than revolvers, they will generate a significantly higher velocity than a revolver loaded with the same ammunition. 

The Model 1894 in .44 Magnum is well-suited for the game up to elk size. With deep penetration, it has even been used to take the larger game. In addition to beating the ballistics of the old .44-40 rifle loads, long considered a top deer cartridge year ago, the heavy, flat point bullets typically used in the .44 Magnum have an additional advantage. 

As you can see, Marlin's Model 336 design is the gun for all seasons. It is the quintessential woodland hunter and a great self-defense weapon.  

Your choice might be the tried and true .30-30 for livestock and game control, or you may opt for a .44 Mag/.44 Spl dual rifle/pistol combination that fits your concerns for self-defense. The choice is there when choosing a lever-action rifle.

Fact is, loaded with performance and accuracy features, a Marlin lever-action rifle will help you put meat in the freezer, protect your herd from predators, or defend your family in a tight situation. All with one rifle.

I believe any Marlin Model 336 in .30-30, or a variant like the Model 1894 in .44 mag, would make a great Ranch Rifle. And yes, that's just the way I see it.

Tom Correa

Guns: The Ruger Vaquero

The Ruger website has it right when it states, "Original Old West Single-Action look, size and feel. The Ruger Vaquero combines the original Old West single-action look and feel with new features.

Since its introduction in 1993, the Ruger Vaquero has dominated the Cowboy Action Shooting world and earned its reputation for rugged reliability due to its strength and mechanical superiority. And yes, it has been referred to as "'the gun that won the New West" because of its widespread popularity among single-action shooters and cowboy action competitors.

In reality the mid-size steel frame and cylinder are scaled-down to the same size as the original 1955 Ruger Blackhawk, closely resembling the classic single-action revolvers of the late 1800's.

In the early 1950s, Westerns like High Noon and television shows like Have Gun Will Travel created a new interest in the single-action six-guns of the Old West. 

Bill Ruger led the charge to create them, beginning with his .22 caliber Single Six revolver in 1953, and following two years later with the first of his center-fire Blackhawk series in the same vein. Though beefier, sporting improved sights, and a stronger mechanism including, for example, coil springs, Ruger left them otherwise true to the original Colt design.

Because of demand for the Colt Single Action Army, Colt Firearms soon brought their equipment out of mothballs and began producing another generation of the original. As with their Single Action Army. Uberti, Great Western, and other manufacturers got into the game too, but there is nothing like a Ruger Vaquero.

The Ruger Vaquero is a six-shot single-action revolver manufactured by Sturm, Ruger based on the .357 Magnum New Model Ruger Blackhawk frame that was introduced in 1973. Today they are available in .45 Long Colt as well.

The original Vaquero came only in blued steel, case colored, and a gloss stainless finish. The gloss stainless finish is intended to resemble closely a 19th Century nickel-plated finish. And yes, all of which are available with wood, hard rubber, simulated ivory or black micarta grips and fixed sights.

The Ruger Vaquero is a New Model Blackhawk with fixed sights consisting of a front blade and a notch milled into the frame at the rear. These initial Vaqueros have only two hammer positions: fully down, and fully cocked.

The first version was a 7+1⁄2 inch barrelled revolver chambered in .45 Colt with a simulated color case-hardened frame and a blue barrel, grip frame, and cylinder. This was followed by models with a 5 1⁄2 inch barrel and a 4 5⁄8 inch barrel based on the other common barrel lengths of the Colt SAA.

The three versions were offered in stainless steel and other calibers including .44 magnum, .357 magnum, and .44-40 Winchester.

Originally all Ruger Vaqueros were shipped with walnut grips incorporating a Ruger logo in a medallion. In 1998, some models began shipping with a "faux-ivory" grip -- and limited runs with gold inlay and engraving were offered.

Like the New Model Blackhawk, the Vaquero does not require the hammer to be half-cocked for loading and unloading because it uses a transfer bar mechanism which prevents the cartridge under the hammer from being fired without the trigger being pulled.

The "New Model Vaquero" comes with checkered black plastic grips, which look similar to the checkered black rubber grips Colt used in the late 19th Century.

Ruger placed the safety warning which used to appear on the left-side of the barrel beneath the barrel on these models to make the gun more aesthetically pleasing.

The original Vaquero, what is now known as the "Old Model", was marketed from 1993 until 2005, and was slightly larger than the Colt Single Action Army. The New Vaquero, produced from 2005 to the present is closer to the dimensions of the orginial 1873 Colt Single Action Army.

The original Vaquero was built to safely fire higher pressure .45 Long Colt ammunition. This means that the original Vaquero was built to withstand much higher pressure than the Black powder chamberings can put out. The reason for this is that the original Vaquero was built with significantly thicker cylinder walls than other revolvers.

Many reloading manuals contain Ruger-only recommended handloads that are considered unsafe for use in other than Ruger Blackhawk, Redhawk, Thompson/Center,  and Ruger Vaquero model revolvers.

Ruger's "New Model" Vaquero model revolvers, having thinner cylinder walls, are not considered safe for use with the Ruger-only loads taken from the older editions of these manuals. Ruger states that the "New Model" Vaquero will handle +P and +P+ ammunition without any issues, but they warn users not to shoot reloads in any of their guns as it will void the warranty.

It is interesting to note that unlike original Colt Single Action Army revolvers, both Vaquero versions are safe to load all six cylinders because Ruger incorporates a transfer bar safety design in it's pistols.

Also, both Vaquero variants permit reloading by simply opening the loading gate, thereby freeing the cylinder to rotate freely, without pulling the hammer into the half-cock notch. As for other new features, the Vaquero includes a patented Ruger Reverse Indexing Pawl which allows for easier loading and unloading, while the traditional beveled cylinder simplifies holstering.

The New Model Vaquero also has an Internal Lock unobtrusively located beneath the right grip panel. It provides an added measure of security. The standard grip is very similar to the grip on the original Single Action Army revolver.

The Bisley variant incorporates the target grip that was incorporated on the Bisley variant of the Single Action Army revolver that was intended for target shooting. It has a lower profile hammer spur, and the Bisley grip is also better suited for users with larger hands having a longer frame that better fits larger hands.

Users with smaller hands may not find the trigger to be comfortable to shoot on Bisley variants, by reason of not being able to place their trigger finger properly on the trigger, the trigger being located further from the grip.

Another variant, and my favorite, is the Birdshead grip, similar to the pattern found on the Colt M1877 and M1878 models.

The last variant is the SASS (Single Action Shooting Society) model of Vaquero. It has the Old West feel and handling featuring the pre-1962 "XR-3" style, steel grip frame and black, checkered grips with SASS logo grip medallion, and just as with the Bisley model it includes a lower wider hammer spur.

In 1999, a limited run of 500 guns in stainless steel and 500 guns in blue with color case hardened frames were offered by Davidson's with a 3 3⁄4 inch barrel and a shortened ejector rod and housing.

These were called the "Sheriff's Model". And yes, in 2005, this short barrel Vaquero was added as a standard option to Ruger's catalog that year.

As stated before, the Vaquero was introduced in 1993 to meet the growing demand for quality modern firearms used in the growing sport of Cowboy Action Shooting. In 2005, Ruger introduced the "New Vaquero" which incorporated a smaller frame, based on Ruger's XR-3 grip frame, making the pistol closer to the size of the original Colt Single Action Army revolver of 1873. And yes, the Vaquero will accept two-piece grips made for the Colt Single Action Army.

The Firearms Distributor known as Davidson's offered two exclusive chamberings of the Vaquero with convertible cylinders. An additional special Commemorative Edition chambered in .40 S&W was ordered by the San Diego Sheriff's Association in 2000 to celebrate the agency's 150th anniversary.

The San Diego Sheriff's Association wanted the Vaqueros to use the same caliber as their normal service weapons. The original order was placed for 500, but later was increased to 800 due to overwhelming response from the association's members and alumni.

Sources conflict on the reasoning, but either to ensure plenty were available for members, or due to a minimum 500 production run size limitation, Ruger went on to produce an overrun of about 200 for a total of 1000 models. Some of those overrun models were taken by the SDSA members. All of the models sold to the SDSA members were embossed with the SDSA logo on the right side of the barrel and came in a special display case along with an acrylic encased badge.

Approximately 125 of the extras were eventually released through select Ruger distributors in standard black plastic cases and with no SDSA logo. Most had the safety warnings on the left side of the barrel like normal Vaqueros and the original SDSA guns.

However, Ruger ran out of the .40 S&W barrels before the frames and cylinders and later produced extra barrels to finish the remaining few guns, some of these were released through select distributors as late as 2009. Those are referred to as "cleanup" models, something all manufacturers do as the production run of a model is winding down. And yes, on those approximately 25-30 cleanup models the warnings normally stamped into the left side of the barrel were moved to the underside of the newer barrels leaving the side clean and completely smooth.

While all of these models are desirable for their unique caliber, the few that escaped without any markings on the left side of the barrel are now sought after collectibles, not only for the unique caliber but for the smooth barrel that many collectors feel adds to the overall beauty of the guns.

What are the Ruger Vaquero specifications? 

Origin: United States of America
Designer: Bill Ruger Sr.
Year Designed: 1993
Manufacturer: Sturm, Ruger
Produced: 1993-Present

Type: Revolver
Caliber: .357 Magnum/.38 Special, .45 Long Colt, and .45 ACP
Action:  Single-action
Feed System: 6-round cylinder
Sights:  Fixed
Barrel Lengths: 3+3⁄4 in, 4+5⁄8 in, 4+3⁄4 in, 5+1⁄2 in, and 7+1⁄2 inch
Weight: 36–48 oz
Variants: Convertible, Montado, Bisley, Birdshead

With the popularity of Cowboy Action Shooting, the Ruger Vaquero found a following. And really, it's a pretty justified following.

The reasons are simple. First there still is a demand for a single action revolver that is more traditional in appearance than say the Ruger Blackhawk. And second, the Vaquero has a winning design that sports a bar safety that supersedes the drawbacks of the Colt Single Action Army's 1873 design.


So why is the Transfer Bar Safety Mechanism, the hammer block bar safety, so important?

All Ruger Vaqueros have the patented Ruger transfer bar mechanism and loading gate interlock that provide an unparalleled measure of security against accidental discharge. And yes, that's is very important.

If you want an example of why that is so important, take for example what happened to infamous Wyatt Earp. Yep, Wyatt Earp.

From a news clipping of the time, the January 12, 1876 edition of the Wichita Beacon:

“Last Sunday night, while policeman Earp was sitting with two or three others in the back room of the Custom House Saloon, his revolver slipped from its holster, and falling to the floor, the hammer which was resting on the cap, is supposed to have struck the chair, causing a discharge of one of the barrels. The ball passed through his coat, struck the north wall then glanced off and passed out through the ceiling. It was a narrow escape and the occurrence got up a lively stampede from the room. One of the demoralized was under the impression that someone had fired through the window from the outside.”

Earp had in fact admitted that it happened when his biographer Stuart Lake asked him about it, and in a note asked Lake to leave out “the little affray with the chair.”

When Lake’s Wyatt Earp, Frontier Marshal did come out a few years later, Earp was emphatically quoted in it as saying "professionals would never carry a live round under the hammer of a single-action revolver."

If Wyatt Earp were carrying a Ruger Vaquero, he won't have had experienced a dropped-gun accidental discharge as he did with his Colt.

And yes, that's only one aspect of the great design that makes the Ruger Vaquero the superior single-action that it is.

But for me, the transfer bar safety is probably the most important part of their pistols.

Now, for full disclosure, I own a "few" Ruger Vaqueros. I bought my first Vaquero in the late 1990s. Now referred to as an "Old Model," I loved the heft of the piece, the balance, the feel and the durability. It is a great single-action in .45 long colt. One that can definitely take the higher pressure rounds.

In 2007, when I got into Cowboy Action Shooting, I bought another Vaquero. But since I liked the "Old Model", because I liked the extra heft, I really wanted to get another "Old Model".  But, when I couldn't find one, I opted for the lighter "New Model" Vaquero in .45 long colt.

The "New Model" Vaquero is a great pistol, wonderful balance, and great handling. The only drawback is that I've been told that it can't take the higher pressure rounds.

Lately, I bought another Ruger Vaquero from one of Ruger's exclusive distributors. It is a Vaquero that I have been looking for for a long time. It is a "Birdshead" Vaquero. And yes, add the fact that a "Birdshead" Vaquero fires the .45 ACP round, which of course is also use in 1911s, and it is one sweet piece.

To me, any purchase of a Ruger Vaquero is a smart buy. They are simply what they are; well made, reliable, durable, and cost effective.

All in all, Ruger Vaqueros are great guns!

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

RANDOM SHOTS! Guns Banned In California, Lincoln Screenwriter Admits Changed History In Film, California Dumbing Down Kids, and More!

FIRST SHOT!

Guns Banned In California?

California's Democrat lawmakers seek toughest gun laws in nation

Just weeks after the state of New York enacted the nation's toughest gun laws, California lawmakers now say they want California to do even more in response to recent mass shooting in Connecticut.

Democrats overwhelmingly control the California State Legislature, and now residents of California are about to see how it feels to have the Democrats in complete control.

This week they revealed 10 proposals that they said would make California the most restrictive state for possessing firearms.

As if in competition with New York as to who can circumvent the US Constitution the best, Democrats held a news conference at the State Capital with San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other anti-gun politicians and police chiefs in attendance.

Sounding like he was truly in some sort of competition, Villaraigosa said, "California has always been a leader on the issue of gun safety. New York has stepped up and stepped forward. California needs to answer the call."

And friends, if you don't think the Democrats at the State Capital have lost their collective minds, you should be very scared at what they are coming up with.

Among the measures is one that would outlaw the future sale of ALL semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines - no matter if it is strictly a hunting rifle or not. The restriction would prevent quick reloading by requiring bullets to be loaded one at a time.

Lawmakers also want to make some prohibitions apply to current gun owners, not just to people who buy weapons in the future.

Like New York, California also would require background checks for buying ammunition and would add to the list of prohibited weapons.

Something California has been doing for a long time now, but they are trying to make it sound like they are just starting it - all for politics.

Those buying ammunition would have to pay a fee and undergo an initial background check by the state Department of Justice, similar to what is required now before buyers can purchase a firearm.

No kidding, Democrats want Californians to go through background checks when buying ALL ammunitions - including shotgun shells, and pellets for air rifles.

After a few background checks, your name goes into a Criminal Database sort of setup as if law abiding citizens are Criminals. Subsequent background checks would be done instantly by an ammunition seller checking the Justice Department's records.

The California Democrats also would ban possession of magazines holding more than 10 bullets, even by those who now own them legally. All would have to be registered.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, promised that gun proponents will fight the measures in court if they become law.

"It strikes me as if these folks are playing some sort of game of one-upsmanship with New York at the expense of law-abiding citizens, and that's just unconscionable," he said about lawmakers.

Republicans are saying that Democrats Legislators are exploiting the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary to push their own anti-gun agendas.

"The laws they are (proposing) would have made no difference in the Connecticut shooting whatsoever," Sen. Dan Logue said.

He added that lawmakers need to focus on other issues that lead to violence. "We've got the issue of PlayStations, where there is violent games," Logue said. "I mean, what about Hollywood and what they are putting out?"

Three bills have been introduced, with others to come before this month's deadline for submitting legislation.

The measures are the most stringent to date among numerous proposals introduced this year all in an effort to completely ban firearms and ammunition from law abiding citizens in California.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said he is confident Democrats can use their majorities in the Assembly and Senate to send the measures to Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown this year.

Brown has declined to comment on weapons legislation before it reaches him, but it is pretty certain that he will sign anything his political party puts in front of him regarding anything part of the ultra-liberal agenda.

Other proposed measures in California would ban so-called "bullet buttons" that can be used to quickly detach and reload magazines in semi-automatic rifles, and update the legal definition of shotguns to prohibit a new version that can rapidly fire shotgun shells and .45-caliber ammunition.

The state also would restrict the lending of guns to keep weapons from felons, mentally ill people and others who are prohibited from ownership.

Instead of fixing a horrible economy, prison overcrowding, gang violence, an increasing crime rate, bankrupt cities, wasteful spending, political graft, hunger and homelessness, the Democrats want to deflect their inability to deal with California's real problems and instead try to pull the public's attention of something that California already has - the strictest gun control laws in the nation.

We here in California are under attack from our own state government. Yes, our rights are under attack by a state government who caters only to the 44% who are Democrats - those who put them in office.

And yes, California politicians wonder why more and more people today are either buying more and more bulk ammunition and preparing for civil unrest - or leaving the state all together.

It seems that a war of some sort is on the horizon in California. Whether it is political or civil in nature, I do not know for certain. But I do know this, because of their blatant lack of representation and respect for our rights as Americans, I can really understand all the talk regarding people preparing for the worse to take place here.


SECOND SHOT!

Screenwriter Admits He Changed History - "Lincoln" Film Factually Inaccurate

Tony Kushner, the screenwriter for the movie "Lincoln," has conceded that he was not accurate in his portrayal of a 19th century vote on slavery.

While facts are not correct, he said his changes adhere to widely accepted standards for the creation of a historical drama. Imagine that, you are not depicting events accurately - but he still believe that its OK to do so.
One US Congressman that doesn't think so is U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney. He has actually taken the time to point out an important flaw in the fictional movie which represents itself as historically accurate.  

And yes, now Congressman Courtney has said that he was pleased screenwriter Tony Kushner acknowledged that the Connecticut Congressmen who was depicted in the movie did not vote against a Constitutional Amendment outlawing slavery - as it is depicted in the film.

Joe Courtney said he hopes a correction can be made before the film is released on DVD.

"My effort from the beginning has been to set the record straight on this vote, so people do not leave the theater believing Connecticut's representatives in the 38th Congress were on the wrong side of history," Courtney said.

After watching the movie over the weekend, Rep Courtney praised the artistry of the film about President Abraham Lincoln's political struggle to abolish slavery, but he took issue with a scene that shows two Connecticut congressmen vote against the 13th amendment.

Rep Courtney asked the Congressional Research Service to investigate, and it reported that all four Connecticut congressmen backed the amendment in a January 1865 vote.

In a letter to the film's director, Steven Spielberg, the congressman includes a tally of the 1865 vote by the state's congressional delegation and a passionate defense of the state's role in emancipating millions of blacks.

A spokeswoman for Disney, which distributed the DreamWorks film, had no comment on whether any changes will be made to the film either theatrically or in DVD form. My bet is that since it cost too much to edit something like that, that it won't be corrected. It would be nice if I were wrong about that.

Tony Kushner, the "Lincoln" screenwriter, said in a statement Thursday that the film changed two of the delegation's votes to clarify the historical reality that the 13th Amendment passed by a very narrow margin. He said the film "made up" new names for the men casting the votes so as not to ascribe actions to real people who did not perform them.

"In making changes to the voting sequence, we adhered to time-honored and completely legitimate standards for the creation of historical drama, which is what 'Lincoln' is. I hope nobody is shocked to learn that I also made up dialogue and imagined encounters and invented characters," Kushner said.

Kushner said he disagreed with Courtney's contention that accuracy is "paramount" in historical drama and said Connecticut should not feel as though it is defamed in the film.

He also said Courtney was incorrect in saying Connecticut was "solidly" pro-Lincoln, saying he received 51.4 percent of the state's vote in the 1864 election.

Courtney, who represents eastern Connecticut, said there was some local opposition to Lincoln but also noted the state lost more than 4,000 soldiers on the side of the Union in the Civil War.

"Their sacrifice emphatically demonstrates Connecticut's fidelity to the struggle to preserve the Union and end slavery, which is represented in 'Lincoln' dramatically by the House's vote on the 13th Amendment. The four members of Connecticut's delegation reflected that commitment on January 31, 1865, and they deserved a better legacy than the screenplay portrayed," Courtney said.

I find it interesting that this screenwriter can admit to being responsible for "made up dialogue and imagined encounters and invented characters" yet wants to argue the amount of support Abe Lincoln got from Connecticut in the 1864 election - which by the way, according to the papers at the time, Lincoln was supposed to lose.

In my opinion, if you are doing a historical piece of work, then a writer is responsible for getting the facts right.

Instead of having to use "made up dialogue and imagined encounters and invented characters," and yes also have Lincoln using vulgar language which he was known not to use, he should have went simply with what we know - or can be researched and verified.

As one noted Lincoln Historian has said regarding the movie, "One thing the movie leaves out is his [Lincoln] relationship with Frederick Douglass. Lincoln came to know Douglass and admire him greatly, and Douglass did come to the White House."

But then again, since the "Lincoln" screenwriter admits to changing history for his own reasons, he obviously doesn't care about getting things right.

In the screenwriter's response to Rep Courtney, published in the Wall Street Journal, Kushner wrote: ...

"I respectfully disagree with the Congressman’s contention that accuracy in every detail is 'paramount' in a work of historical drama. Accuracy is paramount in every detail of a work of history. Here’s my rule: Ask yourself, 'Did this thing happen?' If the answer is yes, then it’s historical. Then ask, 'Did this thing happen precisely this way?' If the answer is yes, then it’s history; if the answer is no, not precisely this way, then it’s historical drama."

In other words, being correct, honest, accurate, precise, factual, are things that he doesn't concern himself with.

It seems that he can make up dialogue, imagine encounters, invent characters, make an audience think that Abraham Lincoln was some foul mouth megalomaniac, and all the while change historical accuracy because his screenplay is not history but instead a historical "drama".

The problem here lies in the fact that many will take this movie as factual and believe it. And yes, there lies the responsibility of the film maker to get it right. He owes it to the public to get it right. If he has any sense of right and wrong, he will try to depict it factually.

NEXT SHOT!

State of California No Longer Requiring Eighth Grade Algebra

California will no longer require eighth-graders to take algebra — a move that is line with the Common Core standards being adopted by most states, but that may leave students unprepared for college.

Last month, California formally shifted to the Common Core mathematics standards, which recommend that students delay taking algebra if they aren’t ready for it. Previously, algebra class was a requirement for all eighth-graders in the state.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative, which is sponsored by the National Governor’s Association, is an effort to unify diverse state education curricula. Forty-five other states and the District of Columbia have signed on so far.

But some education experts worry that the change will further damage struggling students’ college chances, since early proficiency in Algebra I is an excellent predictor of college graduation, according to the Mercury News.

Black and Latino students in California are significantly more likely to fail eighth-grade algebra, and 80 percent of those who fail it once will fail it again when they take it in high school.

A study published by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area claims that some minority students who score well enough to place into advanced math classes are often mistakenly held back.

“School districts have been disproportionately requiring minority students to repeat Algebra I even after they scored proficient or advanced on the Algebra I California standardized tests,” said Kimberly Thomas Rapp, executive director of the committee, in an interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The new standard is a step back for California, and may leave students, particularly minority and low-income students, unprepared for college, said Rapp.

“Back in ‘97 when the state went to a standard that expected students to take Algebra 1 in the eighth grade, that was really about looking forward to college competitiveness and preparing our public school students to be ready to compete to access college systems after high school,” she said. “The reality is what we’re now doing is lowering the standards.”

Instead, Rapp proposed that California schools improve the mathematics curriculum for students in the fifth, sixth and seventh grades, so that they are better prepared for Algebra I in eighth grade.

I believe that California will simply reject any suggestion to make students work harder.

My information tells me that many students entering Junior Colleges after High School are ill prepared for what is expected by them there. I'm told by using test scores from Junior Colleges, it is evident that students lack the basics of English and Math when leaving High Schools.

By cutting back Algebra requirements, we are only dumbing down our kids even further. Too bad the Democrats who run California don't care about strengthening education instead of the weakening it.

NEXT SHOT!

Poll: Most women believe they should not be forced into combat

The majority of American female voters support the idea of women serving in combat, but not being drafted, according to a national poll from Quinnipiac University released Thursday morning at the National Press Club.

Seventy-seven percent of female voters indicated that they favor the combat policy change, the poll showed.

When asked about the reinstatement of the draft, only 28 percent of American voters were in support. Despite widespread favor toward women in combat, only 48 percent of females supported women being drafted, while 59 percent of men supported the idea.

“There is a sizeable difference in how men and women feel,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, in the press release. “There’s clearly a gender gap,” Brown later told The Daily Caller. “But we couldn’t ask why. … We do data, we can’t read minds.”

Women were also timid supporters on the question of whether women in combat will improve military effectiveness. Only 46 percent saying it would.

The data reveals that female voters may believe that women should be allowed to serve in open combat alongside men, but they should not be forced to do so through a draft.

Brown also said he had “no idea” how voters would have responded if they had been asked about whether or not women were capable of performing the same as men in combat. Imagine that!

LAST SHOT!
CA assemblyman proposes “marshal program” in California schools

California Assemblyman Tim Donnelly held a press conference to announce the introduction of the School Marshal Program, created to “protect children from violent intruders in the classroom.”

Similar to federal air marshals who are meant to “blend in” with passengers, this measure authorizes school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to use general purpose funds to provide training to qualified, volunteer teachers, administrators, or janitors who are willing to carry firearms on campus as part of the school marshal plan.

The proposed law builds on the 1995 Gun Free Zone Act, which permits teachers and school staff members to carry concealed firearms if their district permits it.

“We’re not proposing to simply arm teachers,” Donnelly told me, “we’re going to train them to use the CCW they are already have…In 1995, they obviously felt it was important to not deny that right to teachers who felt that need, A.B. 202 just reiterates existing law.”

I asked Assemblyman Donnelly how this potentially controversial approach will protect both students and faculty.

“This is going to build an invisible line of protection around kids by protecting the identity of the marshals,” Donnelly said. “A killer’s goal is to kill. Now he’ll know there are sharks swimming with the fish. The killer isn’t going to know if there’s one gun on campus or 10.”

“Politicians have been exploiting the tragedy in Connecticut and have threatened to ban ammunition, create even more restrictions—none of which would have saved the lives of the children and teachers at Sandy Hook,” he said .An important part of the measure is to protect the identities of potential marshals so they don’t become targets.

Assemblyman Donnelly became emotional as he talked about the courage of the Sandy Hook teachers.

“Talk about heroism—we have a moral obligation to people like young Vicki Soto, who flung herself in front of her students at the cost of her own life,” Donnelly said. “We need to make sure others like her won’t be defenseless when faced with a deranged madman, looking into the face of inexplicable evil.”

UPDATE from Assemblyman Donnelly:

”This is not a state mandated program. AB202 simply empowers local school districts to designate teachers, administrators and staff, who currently have a CCW permit, and volunteer to undergo additional training. Current law allows any school personnel who have a valid CCW permit and permission from their district to conceal carry on campus now. (Ironically, that exemption was protected in the Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995).

We envision that local districts who choose to adopt this plan will obtain training for those volunteers who agree to be designated, “School Marshals” from their local police or sheriff’s training officer at little to no cost.

AB202 does protect the identity of all School Marshals from public disclosure, thereby creating an invisible line of defense around the kids because the perpetrator will never know which teacher is armed, much like the Air Marshals program. Godspeed.”

For more information about the School Marshal Program visit his California Assembly website: http://arc.asm.ca.gov/member/AD33/

I really believe that any protection in today's schools can't hurt.


Story by Tom Correa