I have to say I do have my doubts about the credibility of the government's claims of "convincing information" about the Sudan and Afghanistan missile targets. What can you believe when the Sudan government itself is calling for U.N. inspectors to search the destroyed chemical factory and discover if Clinton's claims are true?

And was it appropriate for the United States to conduct an overt military strike against sites in countries without open hostilities towards America? Not that I don't support military action against terrorist organizations, because I do. But what would happen if Iran launched missiles at a target on U.S. soil that it claimed housed terrorists against their nation? Was a covert special ops force out of the question? The biggest question is this: what consequences will Clinton's actions bring about? Increased terrorist activities against Americans? More bombings on U.S. soil? The possibility of nuclear retaliation in an American city? The thought is truly frightening to think about.

Okay, I've reworked the way this section works. As you can see, the format is different. I'm going to try to be a little more consistent in my little rants here, and I'll try to focus on more realms of interest besides guns! Not that I think anyone reads these things, but what the hell... everyone else on the net is publishing their own worthless opinions. What's one more?

I spent the better part of the day reading Year 2000 doomsday predictions and how people are preparing for the chaos that will supposedly ensue. I can tell you surely, from my rather minor research into the topic, that absolutely no one really has any idea how bad the situation will be when the calendar flips to the year 2000. Most people agree that there will be problems, though there are those (a minority) that believe no effects will be felt. It seems that a lot of folks expect noticeable problems; there are those who think there will be power outages and economic crises for a period between a week and a couple months; then there are those who predict the breakdown of all social order and the end of American civilization as we know it.

Put me somewhere between second and third category. I hope to be prepared to survive for some two to three months on food and water stores. As you might have guessed, I have my own store of firearms, know how to use them, and plan to have quite a bit of ammunition stored up. One of my personal mottos I borrowed from the Boy Scouts: "Be prepared". Even better, "Hope for the best; prepare for the worst." My advice is this: do what you need to make through two or three months of uncertainty, but don't make any permanent changes that will leave you high and dry if nothing happens. You'll look pretty silly in your camouflaged Montana underground bunker if all that happens is a few banks fail. If worse comes to worse, we can all pack up everything that fits in our cars and caravan down to my friend's relative's house in the deep woods of North Carolina. But I don't think that will be necessary.

On the other hand, if you live in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, or any other large, extremely urban locale... ignore what I said. Get out of there; at least to the outskirts of the suburbs. The social order is so tenuous in these places as it is. The slightest nudge will push them over the edge. You just wait and see.

Well, Clinton has admitted his "relationship" with Monica Lewinsky, as if that was a big surprise. What's surprising is how many people were actually shocked at the truth of the matter, and how few people are outraged that the President of the United States would blatantly lie to some 300 million American citizens for months. Some of us have known for a while that Mr. Clinton was a bald-faced liar and had no problem with publicly lying to people who knew the truth. But apparently when you point it out, people just don't care.

"Let's put this behind us"? It boggles the mind that people can still support a man without any personal integrity at all in the role of the leader of our country. He didn't even have the decency to actually apologize for his deception... instead he cites embarrassment to himself and his family. It used to be that national security was the only good reason for lying to the people. I guess times have changed.

They just don't make presidents like they used to.

More and more these anti-gun zealots irk me. While organizations such as Handgun Control, Inc. and Cease Fire continue to present their facade of concern for public safety, the simple truth is that the founders of these groups hate and detest firearms. That is the entire reason for their existence: these people hate guns and want to ban them from the face of the Earth. While many of the misguided members and employees of these organizations may truly believe they are helping make the world safer, that is not the origin of these religious crusades.

It's just not logical to link the banning of firearms to increased public safety. Who the hell is going to protect me from the violent criminals that slip through the gaping cracks of our justice system? What am I going to do when a masked intruder steps through the broken glass of my back door and confronts me in my own home? Call 911? Oh, sorry, he cut the phone lines. Even if I could call the police, by the time they show up, all the may be able to do is lay down a nice chalk outline around me. That's a comfort.

Instead of spending on their money on their persecution of law-abiding gun owners, maybe these folks could divert their funds into something that may actually save lives, like building more prisons. Or pressuring the justice system to actually enforce the laws that are already on the books, keeping criminals in jail. Or helping out the less fortunate, getting them back on their feet. Not taking away the rights and freedoms of millions of Americans.