Friday, April 28, 2006

It's not about "immigrants"

It's about open borders and amnesty for law-breaking leeches.

I swear from the darkest pit of my soul, California cannot slide off into the Pacific quickly enough.

http://cbs5.com/local/local_story_117193118.html

State Senate Supports Immigrant Walkout On Monday

(AP) SACRAMENTO California's state senators on Thursday endorsed Monday's boycott of schools, jobs and stores by illegal immigrants and their allies as supporters equated the protest with great social movements in American history.

By a 24-13 vote that split along party lines, the California Senate approved a resolution that calls the one-day protest the Great American Boycott 2006 and describes it as an attempt to educate Americans "about the tremendous contribution immigrants make on a daily basis to our society and economy."

Social movment, my ass.

OK, putting that second paragraph right after the first one violates so many basic tenets of logic that I don't know where to begin.

If they believe that strongly that we should just let all the people who want to come in here just prance right across the border, then so be it.

Just as long as California gets all of them. Every last one. Let the doe-eyed moonbat blissninnies pay for the health care, food stamps, housing and social services for all of 'em. And I'll sit here and giggle when they start bleating about their increasing crime rate.

Immigrants built this country, and if it were solely a question of immigrant rights, I'd join in. But it's not about immigrants.

It's about ILLEGAL immigrants. It's about caving in to the pressure of an interest group that's going to (hopefully) drive California so far into the red (sic) that they'll run into the Pacific like crazed lemmings when they realize what they've done.

Check that -- the Democratic party knows a voting block when they see one. Border control and national security be damned. Hey - they want to let felons vote -- I wonder whose vote they'll be courting next...

If you want to be able to provide "social services" (God, I hate that term), then surely you've got to acknowledge that the money for those services has to come from somewhere. Perhaps you should figure out how to secure that funding before handing out blank checks. Not that California seems to be all that adept at balancing budgetary matters with social(ist) policy. Even on a national level, we can't even currently provide health care for those people here legally, for God's sake (well, assuming nationalized health care is something you want...)

I'll say it again: We can fix this problem real quick. Build a biiiiiig wall along the southern border. Mine it. The whole thing. The flow of illegal immigrants will slow to a trickle. Then deport the illegals (cheaper than paying for their health care, by a long shot). Only those who came here from a country across a body of water from us get a plane ticket. Everyone else takes a bus to the border. Then they walk.

Then we can concern ourselves with the rights of legal American citizens. As it should be.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Well, crap

I guess I'll have to vote in the next Presidential election.

I voted for Bush in 2004. I'm not pleased about it, either, and I wasn't pleased about it at the time. Look, the Democratic choice was John Kerry -- he's the other Senator from mASSachusetts, for cryin' out loud.

Have you seen that South Park episode about voting for a giant douche or a turd sandwich? Yeah, it was kind of like that.

This time around, I'd rather just get hit in the mouth instead. I already feel that way, and we're barely into 2006.

Considering Bush's track record, I won't miss him. And I'm not talking about stupid poll numbers that keep getting thrown around. Take about ten minutes our of your day, and do a little research on second-term poll numbers, and you'll quickly see what a sorry excuse for excrement-smeared non-news that is. Rather, I just don't think he's done what a conservative Republican is supposed to do, i.e. less-government-all-up-in-your-Kool-Aid.

Kim's perspective on the Bush regime is right on target:
http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/single/9280/

At least the socialists .... er, Democrats have some front-runners (God save us from Hillary). Who the Republicans (or the Stupid Party, to use Kim's phrase) will put in the ring is anyone's guess.

But I'd vote for a turd sandwich before voting for any Democrat.

And I thought I was displeased with my (lack of) choices for President in 2004...

At least I can say some good things about the Bush presidency/Republican Congressional term thus far: the so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban is dead & gone, and the concealed-carry movement has been successful in well over half of the states of America. "Castle Doctrine" laws are gaining momentum. All in all, gun owners have seen worse days.

Of course, Bush said he would have renewed the AWB had it made it to his desk (though we all know he knew he wouldn't have to pay the piper on that one). Just goes to show you he would have sold out pro-gun America in a hearbeat.

That being said, though, I put way more stock in the current Republican administration that I would have put in the Kerry regime -- did any of us really belive those silly pictures of "Kerry the duck hunter"? Geez - I'd take a pheasant hunting trip with Cheney and a case of beer before I'd get within a mile of Kerry and any firearm. No way Kerry knows what he's doing when it comes to guns.

News flash: nobody bought your "I'm-no-threat-to-gun-owners" crap, John. You shoulda' stuck with windsurfing.

I wonder if Bush's "legacy" will end up sucking as badly as Clinton's ...

Monday, April 24, 2006

Empty-handed

Well, after nearly frying "Pole Position" trying to beat Miss Fluffy's high score (she's somehow managed to rig the game ... I bet I could de-bug it with a ballistic-tipped .223) I finally got to bed at around 2:00 am last night.... er, this morning.

Today ... turkey hunting. None of this butt-crack-of-dawn hunting for me, mind you. After the late night, I had brunch (biscuits, gravy, sausage & eggs ........... I live in KY .... what were you expecting, eggs-friggin'-benedict?!?!?) I got afield around 2 in the afternoon.

I saw a beeeeeeeg black snake (darn nearly stepped on it), about a metric ton o' squirrels, and one turkey hen. I came home empty-handed.

For me, at this point, it doesn't really matter that I didn't manage to kill (or even see, for cryin' out loud) anything. I spent hours with my big mouth shut. No TV. No politics. No people. No work. Just me stalking around the woods like some leafy-camo ninja-wannabe with a beeeeg black shotgun.

Aside from that, though ... it's amazing how the world goes on when it doesn't know you're there.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Miss Fluffy...

... now has her own blog.

http://shay-nunsshenanigans.blogspot.com/

She first posted on Wednesday. It's now Saturday. I'm still looking at her Wednesday post.

How lame is that?!?!?

I WAS FIRST!!

I guess that's my 15 minutes of fame.

http://carrygunmemegallery.blogspot.com/

This was in response to Xavier's show-your-carry-gun challenge:

http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/show-your-carry-gun.html

If you haven't, already ... well ....

I've shown you mine. Xavier showed you his. Now you show us yours.

Friday, April 21, 2006

Trip Report


Took a backpacking trip with HODAR the weekend before last to Wilson Creek in the Linville Gorge area in NC. Frankly, I can't recall when I had last taken a good ol', low-stress backpacking trip. This was a great way to get back into it.


Bee-yoo-tiful.

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Honor

I try to keep my trap shut when it comes to Cindy Sheehan. Mostly, I think it's absolutely shameful that she uses her son's casket as her personal anti-war soapbox. On the other hand, I've never seen combat, and certainly never lost a loved one in war, and (generally), I fully support her right to protest and to speak her mind.

When it comes down to it, though, I think dead soldiers shouldn't be used as political pawns. The fact that they sacrificed - when the rest of us didn't - should be honored, and it should be left at that. If you want to protest the war - fine. Just leave dead soldiers out of it.

The whole issue strikes a real chord with me, since I've been utterly fascinated with all-things-military for as long as I can remember. I'm not naive enough to see war as honorable, but I'm certain there is honor to be found in the warrior.

Part of this post nearly brought me to tears:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/04/busted-cindy-sheehans-story-hits-snag.html


Here is another example of how our military treats its fallen soldiers.



The night before the burial of her husband's body, Katherine Cathey refused to leave the casket, asking to sleep next to his body for the last time. The Marines made a bed for her, tucking in the sheets below the flag. Before she fell asleep, she opened her laptop computer and played songs that reminded her of 'Cat,' and one of the Marines asked if she wanted them to continue standing watch as she slept. "I think it would be kind of nice if you kept doing it," she said. "I think that's what he would have wanted."

Todd Heisler The Rocky Mountain News

Casey Sheehan, your sacrifice is not forgotten. Rest in Peace.
Nearing graduation from high school, I came within a day of enlisting in the Marine Corps. My parents were quietly furious. I can't say exactly why I didn't go through with it -- college expectations, cowardice, and a prayer all had something to do with it. I have never stopped wondering how my life may have been different had I stepped up. To this day - every day - military enlistment crosses my mind - even though I'm in my early 30s, and too old for the Marines.

Regardless of my decision, though, I've always had the greatest respect for those who serve. We would do well to honor their sacrifice, and to never tarnish that honor, even in the heat of politics and protest.

h/t to Xavier for the link: http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/sometimes.html

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Xavier says...

... show your carry gun. Right now.

You are carrying ... aren't you?

Here's mine:
















And its "holster":
















Mine's a Para Ordinance 14.45 PXT LDA in the venerable .45 ACP. It's pretty new, so it doesn't have the "character" of most carry guns. Yet.

Take Xavier's challenge yourself:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/show-your-carry-gun.html

I couldn't have said it...

... better myself.

Kevin over at The Smallest Minority gives Nina Burleigh what she deserves:
http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/04/rcob.html

h/t to Tam (yet again) for her take on it:
http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2006/04/politics-same-planet-different-worlds.html

Read the original self-absorbed-sack-of-excrement diatribe here:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/04/17/narrowsburg/index.html

It's people like Ms. Burleigh who keep me here in middle-of-nowhere KY.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

New Orleans...

... should have been washed out to sea, judging by how they treated law abiding gun owners in the days after Katrina. The city officials stole guns. Then they lied about it.

I'd comment further, but LawDog pretty much says it best:

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2006/04/shame-shame-shame.html

Get thee hence...

... and take:

The Apocalypse Survival Test
http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=4191060858327422559

Great fun!

Those who know me won't be surprised, but...


One Step Ahead
You are 75% likely to survive the end of the world.
You're alive, with minimal effects from whatever disaster struck. You're in good health, with moderate supplies, have a plan, and maybe a few other survivors with you to help out with manual labor. Congrats, you're gonna do just fine when all hell breaks loose.

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 70%

Hmmmm .... I camp and I have guns.

Or maybe it's because I've watched Red Dawn about a hundred times...

[h/t to Tam at http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/]

Now.... would somebody explain to me what the 7/10 rule is?!?!?

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Range Report

The Illustrious Miss Fluffy and I (after an utterly exhausting day of mowing ... and mowing ... and mowing some more ... where does all that grass come from?!?!?) took some time to do some shooting.

I took the Para 14.45 LDA PXT Nite-TAC, and she took her Glock 19. We shot this 100-round drill:
_________________________
100 round practice drill
Based on a practice drill described by CLINT SMITH of Thunder Ranch
In American Handgunner Magazine
January/February 2006 Pages 32 & 88

Stage One/5 or 7 yards:
Warm up drills/Focus on Accuracy
Load 3 magazines with 10 rounds each
From the holster, draw and fire 10 sighted pairs.
Focus on accuracy. (20 rnds)

From the ready position:
 Strong hand only, fire 5 singles. Focus on accuracy. (5 rnds)
 Weak hand only, fire 5 singles. Focus on accuracy. (5 rnds)

Stage Two/5 or 7 yards: The Mozambique Drill
Load 3 magazines with 10 rounds each
From the holster, draw and fire two rounds to the body and one round to the head (aka "The Mozambique Drill").
Be smooth. Focus on accuracy.
Perform this drill 10 times. (30 rnds)

Stage Three/5 or 7 yards: Out of Battery Reloads
Load each of 3 magazines with 2 rounds each: Out-of-battery reloads:
From the holster, draw and fire two, reload, fire two, reload, and fire two. (2+2+2).
Perform this drill 2 times. (12 rnds)

Stage Four/5 or 7 yards: Clearing failure to fire malfunctions
Load each of 2 magazines with 4 live rounds and one inert "dummy" round.
From the holster, draw and engage the target, clearing the malfunction with a "tap-rack-ready" malfunction clearance whenever necessary. (8 rnds)

Stage Five/10 and 15 yards: Accuracy at distance
Load each of 2 magazines with 10 rounds each
 At 10 yards from the holster, draw & fire 5 sighted pairs (10 rnds)
 At 15 yards from the holster, draw & fire 5 sighted pairs (10 rnds)
__________________


In stage 4, we didn't have "dummy" rounds (which reminds me - I need to get some Snap Caps) so we just did the reload drill after 4 rounds.

For a wealth of drills, check out this link from The Firing Line:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=204400

Run through one or two of these drills each week, and you'll be dominating your local IDPA match in no time flat. Not to mention, if you carry, you'll increase your capabilities a hundred fold.

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Naturally, I asked...

... , "why didn't somebody just shoot it?!?!?"

Oh, yeah. National Forest. No guns.

Great policy. Until you see your little girl killed by a bear and there's nothing you can do about it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/14/bear.attack.ap/index.html

Six-year-old camper killed by bear
Hunt for black bear is on

Friday, April 14, 2006; Posted: 5:25 p.m. EDT (21:25 GMT)

BENTON, Tennessee (AP) -- Using traps baited with honey buns and doughnuts,
authorities Friday tried to capture a potentially crazed black bear that killed
a 6-year-old girl and mauled her mother and 2-year-old brother.


"Pontentially crazed"? Don'tcha think maybe it was .... hungry?

A CNN "reporter" this morning speculated the bear may have had ... a brain tumor.

Jesus, give me strength.

Dare I speculate that dude may have watched Bambi a few too many times? Or maybe he's the one with the brain tumor.

News flash: Bears are omnivores. Bears are predators. Bears are on the ol' seefood diet -- they see food, they eat it.

It boggles my mind to think that we, as a society, have gotten to the point at which we won't acknowledge that a bear will decide to kill and eat a person once in a while. True, it's rare ... but it does happen. They're bears for cryin' out loud. They eat stuff. And few people will deny that bears in parks associate people with food. Doesn't it stand to reason that - eventually - they may associate people AS food? Especially when eating an animal learns that eating a person won't result in instantaneous bullet-riddled death.

Look, we'll leave the gun out of the argument (briefly). Can't we at least acknowledge that bear spray may not be a bad idea when you're in an area known for having ..... BEARS?!?!? Have we become so limp-wristed that we won't even acknowledge the utility of a can of seasoning to protect ourselves? Have we lost our collective minds? Read the article. Never does anyone interviewed even mention the idea of protecting one's self ... or one's children.

Not only does the "news" media refuse to distinguish between preparedness and paranoia (rather, they subtly equate the two ... it makes for more "interesting stories"), but they don't address preparadness at all -- in any way, shape or form.

When we're willing to see our children turned into bear food, there's very little hope for our society.

Tylenol time.

Then I'm heading for the range to work on close-quarters shooting.

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

What he said

Kim gets it right on illegal immigration:

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/single/9231/

Just a snippet:

...Americans are deeply offended that Mexicans are taking advantage of our
generosity by leeching off the healthcare- and welfare systems designed to
assist U.S. citizens. We’re also deeply offended that Mexicans seem to think
that California, Arizona and New Mexico still belong to them, somehow. We are
deeply offended that Mexicans seem to think that we have to speak their language
to them when they come here, instead of the other way around. We are deeply
offended that Mexicans demand, and get, dual-medium schooling. We are deeply
offended that Mexicans can continue to speak Spanish exclusively without
consequence because there’s an entire support structure of Spanish-speaking
radio, TV, newspapers and industries which cater to their language chauvinism.
We are deeply offended that wanted ads are starting to appear for clerical jobs
in our government where fluency in Spanish is mandatory.

Yeah.

What's killing me is the "news" media's dazzling failure to stick that all-important description of the problem, i.e. ILLEGAL before the more general term "immigration". Half the time, they say it's an issue of "immigration reform". The left-wing Democrats are picking up on this, with a typically gin-soaked Teddy Kennedy quoting JFK's "nation of immigrants" line.

News flash, Teddy: We don't have a problem with immigrants. It's ILLEGAL immigrants (or, more appropriately illegal aliens ... or better yet -- CRIMINALS) that sticks in the collective craw. The very idea that these people can sneak across our border, leech off our tax money, and then parade around in the street for legislation that would let them get away with it makes me want to projectile vomit.

Our laws (in the traditional sense, anyway) frame our society. That's what makes us civil. Hey - that's what civilization is, right? If you have no respect for our laws, how are we supposed to believe you'll have any respect for any other facet of American society?

If I were a recent LEGAL immigrant who had become an American in the LEGAL fashion, I'd be absolutely LIVID. Hell, I was born here, and it's all I can do to keep from putting a few rounds through the TV when the "news" shows footage of recent "protests".

Frankly, I'm not opposed at all to some kind of immigration reform. What I am opposed to is amnesty in any form. Amnesty would do nothing more than reward those who have flaunted a blatant disregard for the laws of the very country these hypocrites claim to want to be a part of.

Instead of amnesty, I want to see these turds deported. I'm sick of hearing tripe from Dems like Bill Richardson who claim deportation isn't "practical". The hell it isn't -- compared with the amount of money spent annually on healthcare alone for these criminals, a nation-wide sweep to find and deport those people would probably demonstrate a cost-savings. Let the cops demand proof of citizenship. Hey - I'm a gun-owner. I'm used to scrutiny. Licensure is a fact of life for me. Let the rest of the nation know how that feels.

Then deport the illegals. All of 'em. And build a wall. And MINE IT. The whole thing. That'll keep 'em out. If immigration reform passes, then they can come in the LEGAL way. Until then, they can get out. I don't care if they waded across the Rio Grande from Mexico or if they came from Italy and overstayed a tourist visa. If you're not here legally, you're here illegally, and that makes you a CRIMINAL. So get out. Vaya con dios. Chao. Bonjour.

And no spending our tax money on charter flights back to Mexico for Mexicans, either. Y'all walked in here -- you can walk the hell back out.

Monday, April 10, 2006

Holy smoke!!

My biggest-hat-tip-in-the-world-to-date goes to...

Xavier Thoughts, for posting the "Gun Control" episode of Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" -- yes, the whole thing -- on his blog:

http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/gun-control-is-bullshit.html

Go thou, watch, and think for yourself...

Pardon me...

... while I pick my jaw up off the floor:

http://www.newsobserver.com/433/story/426887.html

This may actually be the most level-headed "news" media reporting of the concealed-carry issue I've ever seen before in my entire life. Then again, it's a NC news source (which should peak the interest of a certain NC-dwelling member of the circle-of-few-people-who-can-put-up-with-me). When the New Yawk Times starts running "stories" like this, I might just pass out...

(h/t to Kim at www.theothersideofkim.com for the story)

Friday, April 07, 2006

This is how...

... your tax money is put to good use:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/04/mil-060406-usia01.htm

If I may quote:
______________________

Defense Department Seeks $5.2 Billion for Special Operations Forces
06 April 2006
Funding essential to build skills to win war against
terrorism, official says
By David I. McKeebyWashington File Staff
Writer

Washington – The Bush administration has requested $5.2 billion from
Congress to fund a Department of Defense expansion of the U.S. Special
Operations Command, an essential element in winning the global War on Terror,
says Thomas O’Connell, assistant secretary of defense.

_________________________
The article goes on to make a stunning statement about how we should be winning the war in Iraq: with

America’s “capability and capacity to conduct low-visibility, persistent
presence missions and a global unconventional warfare campaign.”


*snip*

In the war against terrorism, Army Special Forces, Navy SEALs (sea, air and land
special forces) and other elite units have demonstrated their unique skills in
Afghanistan, Iraq, Colombia, the Philippines and elsewhere, O’Connell
said. They have served as “effective counter-networks to monitor, isolate,
disrupt and destroy hostile elements,” by working with allies to bring terrorist
leaders to justice and deny them safe havens.


___________________
Translation: these are soldiers who can run their own insurgency. The stunning speed with which we ran the Taliban out of Afghanistan is proof positive that we can play that game. And we can win. Had we just understood that in Vietnam, the "Cold War" would have been about 25 years shorter...

We should have put the same model to use in Iraq. Now we're teetering on the razor's edge of screwing up royally. Our only remaining option may be to just totally inundate and occupy every square inch of Iraqi soil until we can get it back on its feet. It's the old post-WWII Europe model, and it works, but nobody really wants to occupy another country anymore...

For what it's worth, GlobalSecurity.org is like an International Studies major's pipe dream. Reading articles on that site reminds me of writing papers back in college...

Thursday, April 06, 2006

I'm interested to hear...

.... what my Nascar-watching friends think of this one:

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/cartoons/04-06-2006.gif

... and there's no such thing as too much Katie Couric-bashing. Just when I thought I couldn't hate CBS (Commie Broadcasting System .... or just Commie B.S., if you prefer) any more...

Too little, too late

If you've seen the "news" today, you've probably seen the footage of President Bush at an event in NC, at which a man essentially told Bush he should be ashamed of himself.

See the "story" here:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/06/bush.ap/index.html

One of the guy's points (and there were few), was that he evidently didn't appreciate having his phone tapped. Funny thing is, Bush is actually .... finally... articulating the reasons for many of his administration's policies. Unfortunately for him (and for the rest of us who don't want to have to call each other "comrade" or "fellow traveller" after Hillary is elected in '08) it's too late for that.

The whole Democratic/anti-Bush hubbub about domestic surveillance is utter, complete hipocrisy. In any other context, Democrats are shameless in their advocacy for greater government control over, intereference with, and surveillance of, our lives. The "news" media is just as much to blame for feeding the flames of this burning non-issue. In any other context, the media lauds and coos over surveillance cameras "keeping you safe". Over and over, we see footage of the 9/11 hijackers coming through Logan airport, or Di leaving a resturant before dying in a car wreck, bank robbers, etc. Democrats want serial numbers on bullet casings. They refer to governmental control over your health information as "progress". Never mind the fact that none of that crap did anything to save a life.

In responding to the guy in Charlotte, Bush pointed out that the 9/11 Commission Report cited a failure of the government to forsee the gathering threat before 9/11. Essentially, the Report concludes that more comprehensive information might have prevented the attack. Personally, I doubt that, but that's pretty much what the Report said.

Bush is probably right. Abhorrent though it is, had the NSA been more attentive to communications (e.g. phone calls) coming into the country pre-9/11, they may have seen something coming, and we might not have had this problem.

For one thing, articulating that justification now won't help Bush's poll numbers. We've already been indoctrinated that the Bush administration is untrustworthy, and that they're spying on us without warrants. Had he gotten his message out sooner, maybe he could have headed off some of the heat. Now, though, the damage has been done. The discourse has been framed around "warrantless phone tapping" and similar phrases. Bush had his chance to frame the discussion. He missed the boat.

All this still doesn't excuse the "news" media and the Democratic party's two-faced attitude about surveillance. Look at the their track record on surveillance in any other context. It's never presented as "a bad thing". Big Brother is watching you on the sidewalk, in Wal Mart, at the gas station, at the airport, at work .... and if you live in an apartment complex with a "security" camera, he's watching you at home, too. Phone surveillance is no different, and the "justification" for it isn't either: if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about.

If the Democrats and the "news" media are going to get their "pretty pink panties" in a wad about one form of surveillance, they need to have a fit over other kinds of surveillance, too. Because those of us who obey the rules DON'T APPRECIATE BEING WATCHED.

At least now Democrats know how law-abiding gun owners feel. Being treated like a criminal in the name of the "common good" or for "security" purposes sucks ... doesn't it?

Yeah....

..... a sunny afternoon, family, and a .22 lr converter for the AR-15. Let the brass fly....

Sunday, April 02, 2006

So, the requirement....

... to wear ID as a Congressperson is only applicable if you're of a certain skin color?

I don't think so.

LawDog has some appropriate thoughts on Cynthia McKinney.

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/

New Classification!

I shot the IDPA classifier match yesterday, and despite not shooting all that well, I finally went from Novice to Marksman in the Custom Defensive Pistol (CDP) class!

I need to check the time requirements -- I swear, if I can keep my wits about me, I don't think I'm that far off from Sharpshooter.

I need to practice shooting the classifier more often, though. And I need to stop listening to NPR and chugging coffee during the 45 minute drive to the match.... not exactly the way to get into "the zone"...