sandbox's blog
Posted at 3:16pm on Jun. 29, 2008 Don't Wait. McCain Should Pick VP Now.
By sandbox
The conventional wisdom holds that a Presidential nominee, who is not running for re-election, waits until just before their convention to name their Vice Presidential choice. I have read many reasons for this practice, but here’s why I think John McCain should name his VP choice now:
1. His age. As the oldest first term nominee ever, John McCain’s age will be an issue with some voters. I know that people are living longer and McCain does appear to be a relatively vigorous 71 years old. By designating his younger running mate now, he helps diffuse the age issue sooner rather than later. Voters start looking at the “team”, not just McCain. Further, because of McCain’s age, many voters will assume when they are looking at the VP designate, that this particular VP will have a greater likelihood of becoming President than is usually the case. So let’s give the voters a longer period (4 months instead of 2) to get to know and feel comfortable with this Vice President.
Posted in Republicans — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:46am on Oct. 8, 2007 Does Hillary Clinton favor Driver’s Licenses for Illegals?
By sandbox
The above question is one that needs to be asked.
About two weeks ago Governor Elliott Spitzer (D) of New York proposed a policy of having the State government issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. For details and background see
here
Without getting into the pros and cons of this policy (which I am against), it appears that many Democrats and moderates in NY are opposed. In opposition are NYC Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly, former Mayor Ed Koch and others. As the polls show, even a majority of New Yorkers (which is a very liberal state) are opposed.
Posted in Elections — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:17pm on Aug. 8, 2007 Rudy Guiliani and the Border Fence
By sandbox
Currently the national party preference polls favor the Democrats by a wide margin. This has contributed to Rudy Guiliani’s lead in the Republican presidential preference polls, because Guiliani (unlike the other Republican candidates ) runs even with Hillary Clinton in the general election polling. So if we accept the premise that Guiliani stands the best chance of winning in the general election (disclosure: I am a Guiliani supporter), then I think we should consider how Rudy can become more acceptable to the conservative base of the party and, at the same time, bolster his image for the general election.
Posted in 2008 — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:19pm on Jun. 24, 2007 Islamists Entry to US To Be Challenged by Immigration Amendment.
By sandbox
One of the consequences of the Senate trying to pass the Immigration Reform law so quickly (without the usual committee hearings) is that a number of amendments have been offered to make the law more acceptable to the Senate majority. Since these amendments are being proposed and debated on the Senate floor, each proposal is receiving more public and press attention than normal.
One such amendment is quite revolutionary (IMO) and deserves further comment. Even if it is defeated, the fact that it could be introduced, gives us in the anti-jihad community hope that a degree of sanity may finally be introduced into the war with radical Islam. For years since 911, many of us have been saying that it does not make sense to expend so much military, economic, and diplomatic efforts in fighting radical islamists overseas in Afghanastan, Iraq, and possibly elsewhere (all efforts I support), while at the same time allowing potential enemy combatants and enemy sympathizers continued immigration (legally and illegally) into the USA.. Writer Diane West of the Washington Times has written many columns on the subject. (see for example)
Posted in Congress — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:56pm on Mar. 29, 2007 Did Anyone Else Hear Fred Thompson on the Radio Today?
By sandbox
I was listening to ABC talk radio today and along came the Paul Harvey 10 minute segment, with guest host former Senator Fred Thompson. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing and have been looking around the internet for a repeat of today’s broadcast (3/29/2007). Since I was driving at the time I could not take notes, but several things stood out in my recollection:
1. Thompson critiqued the 6 flying Imams and came out strongly for the "Protect John Doe” legislation that Cong. Peter King and others were able to have approved by the House of Representatives yesterday. All the Republicans and half the Dems voted yes. The legislation states that Americans cannot be sued (for discrimination) if they report suspicious behavior on public transport. One of the features of the 6 Imams lawsuit (supported by CAIR) is a threat to sue "John Does" who reported the imams behavior on the airplanes to the authorities.
Posted in Archived — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 7:23pm on Jan. 18, 2007 Ban The Veil (and all public mask wearing)
By sandbox
Since we can't seem to win the more important battles with radical islam (like coming up with a way to legally deport radical islamists), then let's, as a society, focus on some small issues. And let's pick the right small, but by no means minor, issue: banning the veil (and, to be consistent, all mask wearing) in public. It works on many levels:
1. Security--who can argue with it?--with all the video cameras and security devices in public places--how can we allow one group to be an exception? Especially in public buildings and on public transport. Especially a subgroup--Islamic Fundamentalists--from which most of our terrorists are drawn.
Comments (13) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:24pm on Dec. 13, 2006 6 Flying Imams--Let's Investigate and Indict (if warrranted) for Disrupting Airline Travel
By sandbox
So much has been written about the 6 Flying Imams who were taken off the plane in Minneapolis last month. Much informed opinion appears to have conclude that the entire affair was staged by the Imams. For example The Faking Imams
We also read that the Imams, supported by CAIR, are looking for an out-of-court settlement with US Airlines.
Comments (9) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:59am on Dec. 6, 2006 James Woolsy for UN Ambassador
By sandbox
Since we are speculating about who the replacement for departing UN Ambassador Bolton should be, how about R. James Woolsy, Jr.?
He is a former CIA Director under President Clinton, supported the Iraq War, and seems to "get it" re the war v. radical islam. He is classified as a conservative democrat (or now a Lieberman democrat) on national security issues so he can be confirmed by the soon-to-be Democratic U.S. Senate.
Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:48pm on Oct. 16, 2006 How Tom Kean, Jr. Can Win
By sandbox
In New Jersey, Senator Bob Menendez (D) and challenger Tom Kean, Jr. (R) have been running about even in the polls, however Menendez appears to be gaining a slight lead. Given N.J.’s tendency to vote Democratic, if nothing changes between now and election day, Menendez will win perhaps by no more than 5 points. The Kean ads have been all about alleged corruption by Menendez and about tax reduction. These ads are OK, but won’t win him the election in Democratic New Jersey. However, there is another issue which Tom owns and he is not using: The Border Fence.
Comments (4) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:43pm on Jun. 18, 2006 North Korea Prepares Missile Launch
By sandbox
The imminent launch of the North Korean ICBM has been reported. To this amateur observer, several questions arise:
Look at this quote from the NY Times Online Report"
While North Korea claims to have developed nuclear weapons, it has never allowed outsiders to see them. American experts believe that North Korea has enough plutonium for at least half a dozen nuclear weapons and has produced a small but growing nuclear arsenal. It is not known if the North Koreans can build a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on a missile, but experts say it seems plausible that they could do so.
Well, if it is plausible that they could arm the missile with a nuclear warhead, and since they have not announced the missile launch test in advance in terms of direction of fire, it is conceivable they could fire a nuclear armed missile at the USA or Japan or who-knows-where. That being a theoretical (albeit unlikely) possibility--does not this potential scenario justify the USA bombing the missile take-off site before they launch?
Second issue: I just heard Bill Gertz (Washington Times military expert) on Matt Drudge radio show speculate that the USA may actually try to shoot down the missile after launch using our anti-missile technology.
Third: A shoot down by the USA before or after launch would appear to be a deterrent to Iran in our future dealings with them.
Or perhaps North Korea will remove the fuel from the missile and forget the launch.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:33pm on Mar. 5, 2006 Real Reason for Ports Opposition
By sandbox
I have thought that the main reason for the American public (in polls taken) opposing the Ports sale to the UAE Co. was not so much the particulars of port security, but was spillover opposition from other issues. That the spillover is not anti-Arab, as some of the supporters of the sale have inaccurately charged, rather it skepticism (or, more accurately, suspicion of ) Islam. The announcement of the Ports sale came just after several weeks of us seeing the Islamic world go bananas over the publishing of the Muhammad Cartoons in a Danish newspaper.
I started reading several liberal weblogs and noticed when the cartoon topic was raised, along with the normal Bush bashing and general disdain for the entire Iraq War, very few posters actually defended the cartoon protesters, and most appeared to understand the threat to freedom of speech and press coming from the coming Islamic protesters.
So when I read Mark Steyn's column today on the subject, he was, as one would expect, better able to articulate the same conclusion. To wit:
What Democrats seem to be doing with Dubai Ports World, whether they realize it or not, is tapping in to a general public skepticism (to put it politely) about the entire Muslim world. In that sense, the ports deal is the American equivalent of the Danish cartoon jihad: increasing numbers of Europeans -- if not yet their political class -- are fed up with switching on the TV and seeing Muslim men jumping up and down and threatening death followed by commentators patiently explaining that the "vast majority" of Muslims are, of course, impeccably "moderate." So what? There were millions of "moderate" Germans in the 1930s, and a fat lot of good they did us or them.
In other words, the American public (myself included) is wondering how tiny the tiny minority of Radical Islamists really is. And for some reason--perhaps just concidental timing--the Ports issue served as a surrogate for that inquiry.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:52pm on Oct. 16, 2005 It's OK to Name the Enemy
By sandbox
There are those news outlets that name the enemy and those that don't or rarely do (the so-called mainstream media). Which enemy? Radical Islam, Islamofascism, etc.
I am a member of the name-the-enemy camp and I have a hard time understanding those in the avoid-naming-the-enemy camp. I have concluded that rather than try to keep explaining to the avoid-naming-the-enemy crowd the we have an enemy and, yes, we need to fight the enemy, it may be better for us in the name-the-enemy crowd to just go ahead and change our written and verbal communication accordingly. To lead by example.
Several recent events should give us all encouragement. The first was Tony's Blair's
press conference of August 5 after the London subway attacks, Blair was breaking new ground in his language.
Here it is: (Click "Watch the Briefing"):
Blair vows hard line on fanatics
Then two weeks ago President Bush in a long, detailed speech finally, almost 4 years after 911, actually used language that named the enemy.
My point is that while the MSM is still mostly PC on this issue, Messrs. Blair and Bush have managed (ever so slowly) to move the ball forward, hopefully allowing us all to speak more plainly.
So two suggested language changes:
Old: Terrorism New: Islamic Terrorism
Old: Terrorist Attacks New: Jihad attacks
Newspeak: "Following the London subway jihad attacks by Islamic Terrorists, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has proposed new legislation......".
I am sure there are other examples. Am I making too much of out of this or am I onto something? Feedback please.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 8:35pm on Sep. 29, 2005 Man Bites Dog/ Star Ledger Raps Corzine
By sandbox
More bad news for Senator John Corzine in his race for Governor of NJ vs. Doug Forrester. Yesterday we heard new poll results showing Corzine leading Forrester by only 48% to 44% in this heavily Democratic state. Forrester was behind by double digits a month ago. Now today the Star Ledger, the state largest circulation newspaper, and a reliable supporter of Democratic Party candidates, weighs in with an editorial highly critical of Senator Corzine.
It seems the multi-millionaire Corzine likes to make gifts--some to worthy causes and some to not-so-worthy causes. And this creates the appearance that he is buying--through his gifts--various interest groups in the State to support his campaign. He is portrayed as an out-of-control Daddy Warbucks. The Star Ledger is understandably concerned that if elected Governor, Corzine, instead of giving away his own money, will start giving away New Jersey's money. The editorial is a real put-down of Corzine's methods. Is it possible the Star-Ledger will endorse Forrester?
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:53am on Sep. 11, 2005 Tony Blankley, Thank You.
By sandbox
Today, on 911 memorial day, I picked up a copy of Tony Blankley's just-published book:
The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?
I am only half-way thru it, but am glad to report that it is a no-holds-barred history and report on our on-going war with Radical Islam. Blankley takes on the multi-culturalists and the EU appeasers and names/identifies/specifies who is the enemy: Radical Islamist. He cites, acknowledges, and thereby gives credibility to many of the true and faithful opponents of our Radical Islamic enemies--such as Bat Yeor, Robert Spencer, Paul Sperry and others.
There has been so much written about the Clash of Civilizations, however, because of Political Correctness and the dhimmi mentality prevalent in our culture, it is difficult for the message--that the West is in war-to-the-death with radical Islam--to penetrate the Mainstream Media. But because of Blankley's prominence (he is the editorial page editor of the Washington Times) and background--in journalism and on TV--I don't see how his book can be ignored.
By writing this book Tony Blankley has firmly placed himself at the lead of those who are willing to fight.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 7:33pm on Aug. 28, 2005 Give Gaza Back to Egypt
By sandbox
Now that Israel has disengaged from Gaza, what next for this strip of land on the Mediterranean Sea where more than million Palestinian Arabs live? The plan, which is chiseled in stone and accepted as the only way to proceed by UN Security Council, the EU, and the US., is that Gaza will become part of the new Palestinian State. That state will also someday include whatever parts of the west bank Israel eventually disengages from. A new Palestinian State--make that County--will be started. Israel has a State--a Country--ergo the Palestinians must have one.
I think I know the recent history of Gaza, but do feel free to correct me. The land area we now call Gaza was, prior to 1948, part of Egypt. The people living there were Moslems, spoke Arabic, and had many of the same customs and traditions as other Egyptians. During the 1st Israel/Arab war in 1948, some of the Arabs living in the area that was to become Israel left for Gaza and joined the existing Gaza Arab population. Depending on one's reading of history, the Arabs either fled from Israel in fear because of the war or left Israel upon the urging of Arab leaders (the idea being for them to return after the Arabs won the war). In the 1948 war, Israel could have taken over Gaza, but chose not to. Then in 1967, when Israel swept into the Sinai Dessert, it also took Gaza. In the early 1980s, when Israel was giving the Sinai back to Egypt, as part of its Peace Agreement, Israel offered to give Gaza back to Egypt but Anwar Sadat said no.
At the risk of sounding not-with-the-program, I think the best outcome is for Gaza to become a demilitarized part of Egypt, like it was before. The new Palestinian State will be a perpetually unhappy place, always defined by its grievance with Israel. It will be divided into two parts from day one, with the in-between area being their former and current enemy--Israel. The Palestinian leadership is either the corrupt and ineffectual PLO or Islamofascist groups such as Hamas of Islamic Jihad. It will likely become more lawless than it is now.
If I were a current resident of Gaza, and was given a choice between being a citizen of the new PLO State or Egypt, I would opt to be a citizen of Eqypt. Part of a "normal" or "real" country. Give me my Eqyptian passport and let's get on with life. I understand that Egypt has to be persuaded to take the area.
There may be historical instances of solving border disputes between two countries (which is what I think this is) by creating a 3rd country in the disputed area, but I can`t see that improving the situation in the case of Gaza. Since we are all for promoting Arab democracy at this time, how about a referendum for the people of Gaza?. Question: Do you want to join Epypt? Let's see what happens.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Read More »
