With the Presidential Campaign down to its last few weeks, what can John McCain (the guy I’m voting for) do to turn it around? At the time of the bank bailout debate before congress, McCain suspended his campaign (?) and then said he would put off the first debate wirth Obama. He then showed up at the debate anyway. Who is he to threaten not go to the debate after criticizing Obama for ducking debates.? So, IMO, dumb move.

Will John McCain change his position on drilling for oil in Anwar in Alaska? McCain has been opposed and has voted in the Senate against drilling in Anwar. So why should Mr. straight-talk-express change now? The short answer: 1. Votes, and 2. Because what he is saying about the issue doesn’t make sense.

Here is an article by Jonah Goldberg, who has long advocated for Anwar drilling, which sums up the pro-drilling argument.
A Fine Place to Drill--The Anwar Truth

As a Republican observer of the Dems campaign, I can easily imagine a scenario whereby Hillary can win the nomination. So I am surprised to read all the (self-serving) commentary saying HRC can’t win.

I find it hard to believe this story re Sen. Barak Obama apparently hasn’t broken thru to the Main Stream Media. It appears Obama has a friendly and advisory relationship with one Raila Odinga who has been contesting recent presidential elections in Kenya. You can read column by Daniel Johnson .

The Kenya Connection

You have to read the entire article to understand the relationship. Here is the final quote from the article:

About two months ago I wrote an SC Diary titled: Does Hillary Clinton Support Driver’s Licenses for Illegals? .
here

I always thought the ethanol fuel concept was a boondoggle--something the farm lobby pursued to increase the sale price of corn. Now it turns out I was wrong, and this is one thing I am happy to be wrong about. Here is new book that I predict will have a major impact on the way energy is produced.
Energy Victory

About two weeks ago in France riots again broke out in immigrant (mostly Muslim) neighborhoods (so-called “banliueus“) after an apparent traffic accident where 2 teenagers were killed. The riots went on for several days, with the rioters shooting at the police, with many officers injured. See:

France Stunned By Rioters' Savagery

One of the fun things about following the Presidential campaign closely (like the posters on this site apparently do) is you can see an issue coming up and then try to predict the outcome.

About two weeks ago Democratic Governor Elliott Spitzer of New York proposed a policy of having the State government issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. For details and background see
here

With the issue of the Iraq war still at the forefront of the presidential race, this diary shows a route likely to be adopted by many on the right. Promoted by Specter

With public support for the Iraq war declining, and with it President Bush’s poll ratings, where will US Iraq policy be one or two years from now? Daniel Pipes has been writing for some time now about a kind of mid-way policy between leaving Iraq altogether and continuing the current intense and active ground operations. In today’s NY Sun, Pipes writes:

Two positions dominate and polarize the American body politic today. Some say the war is lost, so leave Iraq. Others say the war can be won, so keep the troops in place. I split the difference and offer a third route. The occupation is lost, but the war can be won. Keep American troops in Iraq but remove them from the cities.

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)

It has been over a year since Israel disengaged (got out) 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 Country--will be started. Israel has a State--a Country--ergo the Palestinians must have one.

My understanding of the the recent history of Gaza is as follows: The land area we now call Gaza was, prior to 1948, part of Egypt. The people living there were mostly Sunni Muslims, spoke Arabic, and had many of the same customs and traditions as 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 the 1967 war, 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.

I just read that New York State will have its presidential primary on Feb 5, 2008. So far I think New Jersey, California and who knows how many other states are planning their Presidential primaries for that date. 2/5/2008 could also be in the middle of a freezing cold spell. For example on Feb 5, 2007, the average temperature in Central Park, NYC, was 13 degrees F.

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KNYC/2007/2/5/DailyHistory.h...

Being a pessimist, I can see lots of problems.

The states we previously associated with mid-winter primaries are Iowa and New Hampshire, separated, I think, by a week. Then will come big super Tuesday--Feb 5. I have never been to Iowa in the winter, but I think the populace there is similar to New Hamshire in a snow-and-ice-friendly kind of way. That is folks in those states keep moving around during the winter no matter the weather. Obviously, skiing is a major tourist industry in New Hamshire--so snow is welcome. And in those two states, the presidential primaries themselves are tourist/media attractions--so I think the folks in those states are higly motivated to vote (or caucus as in Iowa) even in bad weather.

Three well-publicized cases of Muslim activists attempting to impose sharia (Islamic) law on non-Muslims are in the news, all going on in Minnesota:

1. the case of some Somali Muslim taxi drivers at the Minneapolis Airport who refuse to take passengers who are carrying package liquor. At first the airport worked out a system of alternate lines to accommodate the drivers, but the airport is now considering rules to suspend the license of these taxi drivers. See here

2. the Minneapolis Airport is also where the so-called 6 flying imams were ordered to leave their flight after behaving suspiciously and causing commotion on the plane. They are now suing US Air for discrimination. See here