Pros: It’s local. I enjoy going to my caucus and seeing people from my neighborhood. We get to sit down and talk about the issues that matter to our neighborhood. It truly is the most grassroots that you can get in the American political system.  It’s exclusive, meaning that you have to be affiliated with the party to attend its caucus meetings and be involved in the primary process.

Cons: It’s exclusive, meaning that you have to be affiliated with the party to attend its caucus meetings and be involved in the primary process.

In Utah, something like 12.5% of voters are registered Democrats, while 34% of voters are registered Republicans.  That leaves 53.5% of voters unaffiliated/independent.  As caucus attendance numbers dwindle, elected candidates come more from the fringe of each party, alienating a large portion of general election voters. How do you think Utah elected Mike Lee?! Mike Lee won the Republican nomination in a hotly contested Republican Primary 51%-49% (the final count was around 2,000 votes). He was carried by one ULTRA conservative county. When it came to the general election, Lee (R) defeated Granato (D) by almost a 2-1 margin. Many of Utah’s independents are Republican-leaning, and 7 times out of 10 candidate (R) is going to win in a national election.

In my discussions with many former-Republican-now-unaffiliated Utahn’s, they say that they left the party because of the caucus system. They feel that only “extreme” voices were “allowed” or “heard” and that anybody who questioned the “official party position” was ostracized. Because of the neighborhood affiliation of the caucus system, this created strain between neighbors and rather than potentially lose close friendships or create negative feelings within the neighborhood, they simply left the party (or no longer attend caucus meetings if they’re still affiliated).

So what’s the answer? Part of the answer is for more people to get involved in their caucus to make it truly more “representative” than it currently is. Of course, this means that people will have to care enough to get involved and to take the risk of arguing with neighbors. Until then, the more “extreme” elements of each party will continue to dominate Utah politics and we’ll continue electing jackasses like Mike Lee.

So please, if you live in Utah and you’re not affiliated with a party, get affiliated.  If you are affiliated, attend your local caucus meetings.

Now I’m all set up to review some Fiocchi 125gr SJHP .357 Mag! 

Being as busy as I am, I don’t get to the range as often as I’d like.  What can I say, with a work, family, and two graduate programs, you find the time!  But, to be fair to the good people at AmmoForSale.com, I wanted to throw up a quick post about their website.  The site is clean and attractive.  Not cluttered like some other retailer websites.  The first things you’ll see are:

• Most popular selling items – Get the deals before they’re gone!
• Most popular brands – Remington, Winchester, Federal, Fiocchi, Sellier & Bellot, Hornady, PMC, Magtech, CCI, American Eagle.  AmmoForSale.com has it all!
• A link to their hottest deals – Get the deals before they’re gone!
• A place to sign up for the weekly specials newsletter – Free email-delivered newsletter of the hottest ammo deals on the internets, God. Bless. America. 

AmmoForSale.com carries a wide variety of the most popular calibers.  Just for fun, here’s what they have available in .357 Mag, which can be pricey if you’re buying it off a store shelf.  Head on over and check out their website and while you’re there, take advantage of their great prices and topnotch customer service.

Though the winter weather taking a turn for the worse this week here in Utah, stay tuned for my review on this Fiocchi 125gr SJHP .357 Mag ammo from AmmoForSale.com. 

• In order to stream Netflix, you must also have an XBOX Live Gold subscription.
• It does not upscale ripped movies. I’ve ripped several of my movies to my hard drive and would love to watch them on my TV via an XBOX.  However, since they’re all reduced in size (for space) they’ll be played back in the reduced format.  The PS3 will automatically upscale those files to 1080p HD.
• It does not play Blu-ray without purchasing a separate drive.  The PS3 plays them out of the box.

Also, this weekend I’ve been playing with my brother-in-law’s Logitech Revue with Google TV.  It’s pretty sweet.

Oh  yeah, and I’m not a gamer so that does not factor into my decision.

Introduced in 1997, the P99 never really reached widespread market success in the US.  I don’t really know why.  One reason could be Glock’s dominance in police market.  Another could be that the Assault Weapons Ban limited the P99’s 16 round 9mm magazine to 10 rounds.  However, the number one obstacle in Walther’s growth in the US market is Walther’s US strategic partner – Smith & Wesson.

Losing market share and a court battle to Glock, S&W was looking for a change in their polymer pistol line up.  The Sigma had been, and still is, a disaster.  I’m not really sure why S&W still manufactures them, except to stay in the budget pistol business.  Anyway, in 1999 Smith & Wesson entered into a strategic partnership with Walther to “distribute Walther branded firearms and accessories in the United States.” 

Thus, the P99 was introduced to the States and S&W was able to produce another company’s plastic auto pistol design, while this time avoiding the court battle.  Conveniently, the SW99 was priced below the P99 and was available not only in 9mm and .40S&W, but in .45 ACP as well. 

In 2005, Walther had fallen way behind in the civilian polymer pistol arms race.  Glock was well into their 3rd gen pistols.  Springfield Armory had found huge market success with the XD.  And Smith & Wesson dropped a bomb – the M&P.  Walther’s strategic partner had finally developed their own polymer pistol. 

Now, six years later, Walther has released an updated version of their pistol.  Will it gain market success in the United States?  I’m not sure and I have a few concerns.  When was the last time you saw an advertisement for the P99 or the PPQ?  Walther just doesn’t market to American gun owners the way that Glock, Springfield Armory, and Smith & Wesson do.  Taurus markets their guns better than Walther. 

There is also a HUGE conflict of interest with Walther’s strategic partner.  No matter how superior S&W thinks the M&P is to the PPQ, the PPQ may not be marketed aggressively or priced competitively.  Also, you probably won’t see the PPQ in any of the gun games, though competitive shooting might help the PPQ gain some notoriety in the industry (the PPQ is roughly the size of a Glock 19, so a Long Slide version would need to be released).  Until these things start happening, the PPQ will continue to be dismissed within the American shooting industry.

What I’d really like to see is Todd G. at pistol-training.com do to the PPQ what he’s done to the HK45, the M&P, the HK P30, and the Gen 4 Glock 17.  Put it through the paces and see how it stacks up to these other firearms.  If it doesn’t stack up well then the industry can continue to ignore it.  However, if it performs admirably, maybe Walther should rethink its strategic partnership with Smith & Wesson.

Men rarely admit their fear of freedom openly, however, tending rather to camouflage it – sometimes unconsciously – by presenting themselves as defenders of freedom.  They give their doubts and misgivings an air of profound sobriety, as befitting custodians of freedom.  But they confuse freedom with the maintenance of the status quo; so that if [an idea] threatens to place that status quo in question, it thereby seems to constitute a threat to freedom itself.  – Paulo Freire

Really?  Are you kidding me?  This is what happens when you contract out your personal safety.  Buy a firearm.  Learn how to use it.  Take responsibility for your own protection. 

But I guess that’s not what this administration wants.  More debt.  More reliance on government.  That’s what this administration wants.

This little piggy went to Wal-Mart

This little piggy had pudding

This little piggy had none

This little piggy had some roast beef

This little piggy went wee wee wee all the way home.

So let’s sum this up.  The one option that Microsoft gives me to fix my problem gets locked down because I’m trying to get the new email and all of my contacts up and running.  Great. 

Why not just stick with Google, you ask?  I really don’t mind Gmail.  If aesthetics means anything I’d rather go with Hotmail and SkyDrive.  I’m not a fan of Google’s privacy policy.

Well, about a year ago I started to pay attention to the changes that Microsoft has been making within Hotmail.  My Hotmail address was now called a Windows Live ID (not sure when that happened) and served as a single sign on for integration with Windows Live and SkyDrive services.  I did some poking around and discovered that I could create a second email address for my Hotmail account (Microsoft calls it an Alias) and use both interchangeably from the same place.

The more I used the service the more that I started to like it.  I linked Windows Live with Facebook and LinkedIn and could chat with all of my Windows Live, Facebook and LinkedIn contacts through Windows Live Messenger (not to mention Yahoo! and AOL contacts).  SkyDrive is a cool service and I like the functionality of the Office Web Apps.

I started using Windows Live Groups for collaboration on papers and PowerPoint projects for school.  That’s when I noticed something that didn’t make me very happy.  You see, I’d been using my “alias” email address for almost a year and loved it.  All of my contacts from ALL of my services were in one place.  I thought I had found the golden ticket, the way to escape the foibles of youth.  I was wrong.  While working on a group paper for one of my classes I noticed that my Windows Live ID (my silly teenager email address) was the contact information being displayed.  This made sense, considering that the collaboration takes place on SkyDrive and your Windows Live ID is used to sign in to the service, but it was no less embarrassing.  My colleagues assured me that there was nothing to be embarrassed about but they weren’t the ones with the stupid name on the screen.

I went on the offensive.  There had to be a way to change my Windows Live ID and get away from that stupid email address.  I searched the Account overview page and thought I found my answer.  An option to change my ID.  I clicked it and was met with this answer: “Your Windows Live ID can’t be changed at this time.”  What?  Why not?  If I have the option to change it, why won’t they let me change it?! 

I found the answer in the Windows Live Help forums:

Currently, accounts with domains like @hotmail.com, @live.com and @msn.com can’t be changed.

Because you are using an e-mail address that was provided by MSN or by Windows Live, you cannot change the name of your mail account and maintain your messages and contacts. For example, you are using an @hotmail.com e-mail address, an @msn.com e-mail address, or a Windows Live Admin Center e-mail address.

You can create a new e-mail address and manually forward your e-mail messages from your current account to the new account that you have created.

In a word, frustrated.  I can understand that logistically it could be a nightmare for Microsoft to maintain changes to its Windows Live ID’s, especially since there are supposedly around 360 million world wide.  But if I can create 15 email addresses (“aliases”) associated with my Windows Live ID and if I can convert a non-Hotmail/Live/MSN Windows Live ID to a Hotmail/Live/MSN Windows Live ID, then why can’t I change my Hotmail.com Windows Live ID?  Simply creating a new account and then linking my ID’s  doesn’t fix the problem.  Since I can’t change my ID, at least be allow me to choose how my name appears to others so that when I’m collaborating on SkyDrive or sending people a chat invite I can present myself as needed now, not how I thought 12 years ago.

One other little change I’d like to see.  My Google calendar can sync with my Windows Live calendar.  Why won’t my Windows Live calendar sync with my Google calendar?

Proponents of a more refined First Amendment argue that this freedom should be treated not as a right but as a privilege – a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis that can be revoked if it is ever abused or maltreated.