Remembering Eric

Eric M. Sand was a son, brother, husband, father, son-in-law, brother-in-law and a truly good and gentle soul. He was my brother-in-law, but I thought of him as the brother I never had.

Being a dad was his greatest joy. The thing I remember most, about his short time with his young son, was him listening to Kansas’s Greatest Hits with my nephew and especially the way he would sing ‘Horse With No Name’ to him and the way they would both be smiling and laughing.

He was a devoted, loving husband and took wonderful care of my sister. They had so much in common and yet their personalities were different and complimentary. I’ve never known my sister to be as happy as she was during the time she shared with Eric.

Eric was very giving, loving and unselfish. My wife Denise has four children from a previous marriage. They were all young adults when I met her. Eric treated all of them like they were his family, giving them attention and advice. He had an impact on all of their lives that to this day they still talk about. When he died, they all mourned him like they had lost a family member they’d known for all their lives.

My two fondest memories of Eric were when he’d come to my parent’s house for dinner and when he, my sister, my wife and I would all go camping. He was a fit guy, with an appetite that belied his trim frame. When he would come over to my parent’s house for dinner he would always make my mother happy by clearing his plate, taking seconds or even thirds and making sure that there were no leftovers. I would joke with him that if he kept going he’d actually eat his plate. When we would go camping there were certain rituals that were always followed. First we’d setup our tents, then we would start searching the woods for kindling and logs for what would inevitably become not just a campfire, but a roaring bonfire. Along the way, Eric would always find himself a sturdy stick. This stick would double as both a walking stick and a poker for the fire. I can still see him in this worn brown bush hat and his sleeveless plaid, flannel shirt, smoking a cigar, smiling and sitting by that roaring fire. Those camping trips were always fun and always something we all looked forward to. I miss those trips, almost as much as I miss Eric.

As I mentioned he was a gentle soul. He was soft-spoken but also able to take care of himself and his family. He took Tae Kwon Do in Manhattan and was very good at it. But at the same time, he would go to great lengths to avoid a confrontation, if possible. I said at his memorial that Eric, in the words of Teddy Roosevelt, “spoke softly and carried a big stick”.

My other great memory of Eric was the way he bonded with my late grandmother over Martinis. I believe that Eric is watching over my sister and nephew, who he loved more than anyone or anything. Sitting with my grandmother, drinking martinis.

It’s been 8 years now, but it feels like it was only yesterday that we lost him. I remember him everyday. But today as I write this remembrance, the memories are much more vivid and the emotions they invoke are more difficult to restrain. My eyes are full of tears of both pain and of joy, the pain of his loss and the joy of knowing that the memories of him and his life haven’t faded.

Eric was working in the North Tower of the World Trade Center for Cantor Fitzgerald on September 11^th, 2001. He was taken from us far too soon. But he will never be forgotten. Not in eight years, not in eighty years.

We Were Safer 10 Months Ago

I’m not an expert on terrorism or intelligence gathering. But I am an expert on the impact of terrorism on Americans. As I’ve mentioned before on this program, my brother-in-law was one of the 2,996 people that were murdered on September 11th, 2001. He was working in the North Tower of the World Trade Center when American Airlines Flight 11, piloted by an Al-Qaeda terrorist slammed into it. The effects of his death and the deaths of all those lost in both World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon, American Flights 11 & 77 and United Flights 175 & 93 are still being felt by my family and all the 9/11 families to this day.
By most credible accounts, there was no actionable intelligence that the attacks were going to be carried out on that day in the way that they were. There were many factors that prevented our intelligence agencies from having the information we would have needed to prevent the 9/11 attacks. I personally think that the impeachment of Bill Clinton, which distracted his administration, the Congress and the public, as well as a general apathy, both in the government and in the public were contributing factors. We thought we were safe, we thought we were invincible and the government to that point had treated terrorism like a law enforcement issue. Likewise, most had forgotten Al-Qaeda’s first failed attempt to bring the Towers down in 1993. I was working in a pharmacy, directly across the street from the Manhasset Long Island Railroad station at the time. I can clearly remember the people, many of whom I knew on a first name basis, streaming into our store with soot on their faces and especially their noses that evening. The looks on their faces, stunned and frightened said just one thing they now understood what terrorism was.But the biggest single factor preventing us from being ready on September 11th, 2001 was the lack of human intelligence. Our foreign intelligence and domestic law enforcement agencies weren’t on the same page and weren’t communicating the things they knew and connecting the dots. Prior to 9/11 the CIA and FBI weren’t permitted, or inclined to share information. And a few do-gooder politicians, most notably former NJ Senator Robert Torricelli, had made rules regarding who the CIA could and could not use as paid informants. This policy was enacted by President Clinton and became known as “the Torricelli Principle”. The Torricelli Principle grew out of an alleged conspiracy between the CIA and the Guatemalan Army. The conspiracy theory concerned the CIA's supposed illegal funding of the Guatemalan army in its fight against guerrilla groups. As it turned out, the CIA wasn't funding the Guatemalans. It was simply paying a Guatemalan officer for information on drug smuggling. But the conspiracy buffs managed to convince Torricelli to buy their theory about the back-channel funding and the informant's role in killing an American citizen. This allegation turned out to be untrue. But Senator Torricelli managed to get the CIA Director to adopt a policy that said they couldn’t employ terrorists as sources. How can we expect our intelligence agencies to infiltrate terrorist organizations, to gather the information they need to keep us safe, if they can’t employ terrorists?
Post 9/11, the Bush Administration put in place policies designed to make the CIA and FBI share information on terrorists and employed techniques, though controversial in the minds of some, that kept this nation from being attacked again. They treated international terrorism as a war, utilizing the military to track down terrorist leaders and training camps around the world and taking them out. They recognized that this is a very different war. Waged by people that don’t wear uniforms and who haven’t signed the Geneva Conventions. Our enemies deliberately target civilians and don’t represent nations, but instead an ideology.
Now eight years after 9/11 the CIA is being defanged and demoralized yet again by liberals that live in a fantasy world, where the bad guys are playing by some sort of rules. Al-Qaeda beheads anyone unfortunate enough to fall into their hands. The US gives captured terrorists, medical care, good food and the chance to practice their religious beliefs. With the approval of President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, the same guy that okayed the Marc Rich pardon, has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the CIA, the agents that interrogated high value terror detainees, like Kalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the attorneys that gave the Bush administration guidance on which Enhanced Interrogation Techniques could be used. Those techniques got KSM to reveal information that prevented additional attacks on the US and our allies, when less aggressive techniques failed. In short a little discomfort applied to the mastermind of 9/11 kept hundreds, perhaps thousands of innocent people from being killed.
At the same time the CIA is being investigated, the Obama administration is releasing dangerous detainees from Guantananmo Bay back to countries like Yemen, that harbor terrorists and that won’t even guarantee the former detainees will be imprisoned when they get home.As the 8th anniversary of 9/11 approaches this coming Friday, I fear that we’re much less safe than we were just 10 months ago. I think that this administration and this Justice Dept. have returned us to a pre-9/11 footing and that the results will be more American families suffering the same losses that the 9/11 families suffered and continue to suffer. I hope that I’m wrong, but I think I may actually be understating the danger.

Freedom of Speech With Responsibility

I want to talk about our rights to freedom of speech and expression, as well as the responsibilities that go along with those rights. I want to state at the onset, that I’m not telling anyone what to do, or advocating censoring anyone.
In the past few months Americans, especially conservatives, have been active and vocal in a way that we haven’t seen for quite some time. We’ve been going to Tea Parties, healthcare rallies and town halls. We’ve been writing and calling our legislators to express opinions and ask questions. All of these are our rights, guaranteed to us by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But with those rights, comes a certain amount of responsibility to use those rights wisely.
We have seen people on both ends of the spectrum using language that, while it is their right to use, one might question the responsibility they’re showing in using it. On the right we’ve seen and heard President Obama called a fascist and compared to Hitler. On the left we’ve heard average Americans called racists, rednecks, teabaggers, and even un-American just for disagreeing with the president. In both cases the people saying these things have every right to say them. Free speech, by its very nature can be controversial, inflammatory and even offensive. I would never try to limit or legislate anyone’s freedom of speech beyond the accepted restrictions on incitement to violence or the preverbal yelling fire in a crowded theatre. But when we choose to use our freedom of speech in what some might consider irresponsible ways, to shock or to anger, I think we sometimes diminish the impact of what we’re trying to say and ourselves.
For example, Janeane Garofalo can say that Michael Steele or any black person that’s a Republican is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, that’s her right. But the only people that remotely take her seriously are those that are on the far left fringe.
Someone on the right can compare Barack Obama to Hitler, but since the president hasn’t rounded anyone up or committed genocide, only those on the far right are likely to take that comparison seriously.
Likewise, the people that have legally carried AR-15s and handguns to Obama’s healthcare town halls are exercising both their First and Second Amendment rights. But one can legitimately question the responsibility of doing so. Forgetting the fact that the president is there to discuss healthcare, not gun rights. The Secret Service and the police are doing a difficult job, protecting the President of the United States. Carrying weapons in the vicinity only makes their job that much more difficult and stressful. It also gives media outlets like MSNBC the chance to paint all protestors as the next potential Timothy McVeigh’s. Again, I’m not telling anyone what to do. But I am trying to make people think before they act.As someone that airs this program, writes several blogs, many letters both to the editors of newspapers and to elected officials, as well as attending town halls and protests, I cherish our First Amendment rights and appreciate the passion that so many are showing at this difficult time in our nation’s history. I understand that many of us feel our rights to free speech and expression are under attack. When elected officials, members of the media and FCC diversity officers seem poised to stifle those whom they disagree with, it’s important that we not be silent. It’s important that we express our views and not just question, but question with boldness. We must speak without fear. As Thomas Jefferson said, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent”. In a democratic-republic, such as ours, where our elected officials have forgotten that they represent us, not rule us, it’s especially important that we speak out. But I do believe there is a difference between being bold and even provocative and being irresponsible, even stupid. Each of us must decide for ourselves, perhaps with a little guidance from our friends and family, how far to go. All I would ask of all Americans is that they think and not let their mouths get ahead of their hearts or their minds.

Wexler & Hastings Won't Face Their Constituents

Today I joined a protest outside the staged healthcare forum that occurred in Delray Beach at the South County Civic Center. Representative Robert Wexler (D) FL-19, who actually lives in Maryland and Alcee Hastings (D) FL-23, the impeached federal judge turned Congressman, spoke at a closed forum sponsored by the Florida Association of Retired Americans. There were 500 seats and the tickets were given almost exclusively to supporters of Obamacare. The questions had to be written down on cards and there was no interaction between the audience and the congressmen. According to those that were able to get inside, the questions were softballs and both Wexler and Hastings made it clear they're steadfastly for the "public option".

Outside the Civic Center the SEIU and Organizing for America were protesting for Obamacare with their printed signs and a marching band (dressed in Obama t-shirts) bussed in, at taxpayer expense, from Ft. Lauderdale at the request of Alcee Hastings to drown out the opponents of the President's plan. A woman with a handcart and two coolers of cold water, screened people to make sure they were for Obamacare before she would give out a bottle in the searing heat. I guess that's the compassion that we can expect from a single-payer health plan as well.

Those of us against Obamacare would not be drowned out, either by the marching band or the thugs that spent the day yelling "liar, liar, liar" and "Yes we can!".

The Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, which had a deputy taking pictures of the protestors and their signs, estimated the crowd at about 1,500. I'd say the numbers for and against were about equal, we may have slightly outnumbered them. But we weren't bussed in or paid to be there. The "astroturf" was definitely on the pro-Obamacare side.

While the congressman from Maryland was bloviating inside, candidate Edward Lynch, Wexler's opponent was addressing the crowd outside. And unlike Wexler was answering questions from anyone that had one. Since Ed has actually read the bill, he was able to field questions from those forand against Obamacare.

The press was out in force and from what I saw on TV when I got home from the event, the coverage ranged from fair-to-biased. Most of the coverage I saw was critical of the high school marching band being bussed in. They interviewed a couple of the kids, who seemed to have no idea why they were even present. Hopefully there will an investigation into who authorized them to be out of school and who paid for the trip. It would be interesting to know if their parents were aware that their children were being used this way.

Clearly the local Democrat congressmen are going to vote for this ill-conceived legislation, no matter how many of their constituents tell them that they're against it. Hopefully, enough "Blue Dog" Democrats will feel the heat from their voters and join with House Republicans in opposing the bill. That and the fact that the Senate version doesn't include the "public option" may kill the bill. We can't stop voicing our opposition now. We have to continue to speak and speak without fear!

For Crist Avoiding Censure Is No Victory

Charlie Crist may have avoided censure at the Palm Beach County REC on Wednesday, but that shouldn't be mistaken for a victory. There were three votes that evening; the first was congressional candidate Edward Lynch's (CD-19) motion to postpone the censure vote indefinitely and failed in a 64-64 tie. The second vote was whether to censure the governor for myriad political offenses that have outraged the vast majority of the members. The Governor narrowly avoided censure in a contentious 65-65 tie vote. The final vote was on whether to conduct a straw poll at the October 14th meeting. The straw poll passed by a healthy margin.

What's lost in all these votes was the debate that ensued on each issue. In each case those for and against censure universally criticized the Governor and expressed more than just displeasure with Crist and his policies. Charlie's appointment of Democrats to the courts and county commissions were attacked. His lack of support for our 2008 congressional nominees, Marion Thorpe, Allen West & Edward Lynch and support for liberal-Democrat Robert Wexler (CD-19) were roundly criticized. But what seemed to have many REC members the most angry was his fawning over Barack Obama in Tampa, supporting the $787 billion "stimulus".

I would predict that when the straw poll for the US Senate nominee is held on October 14th, Palm Beach County will vote for Marco Rubio by a wide margin, as has happened in every other county that has held a straw poll to date. Clearly the grassroots of the RPOF have no intention of rewarding Charlie for his poor leadership as governor. Crist can raise all the special interest and out-of-state money he wants. He can claim that he's "true conservative". But the rank-and-file members of the Party have had it with him and RPOF Chairman Jim Greer and are voicing their disgust in no uncertain terms.

Charlie avoided censure because there was a split in the REC over whether it was an appropriate remedy for political differences. I argued for the postponement and against censure because Charlie hasn't broken the law or committed any ethical offenses. That's the only reason he was spared censure. I argued for the straw poll because I want to send him a message, but wanted to avoid giving the liberal media another opportunity to paint the Florida GOP as divided and as "eating it's own". But, anyone that was present at our meeting and heard the debate can tell you, avoiding censure was no victory for Governor Charlie Crist.

The Unfairness Doctrine Endrun

I want to talk about something that scares me even more than the socialized health insurance issue. In late July, while everyone was focused on healthcare and the town halls, a man by the name of Mark Lloyd became the Chief Diversity Officer of the Federal Communications Commission. This is yet another Obama czar, who wasn’t confirmed by the Senate. Mr. Lloyd was a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress focusing on communications policy issues, including universal service, advanced telecommunications deployment, media concentration and diversity. He was also in the Clinton White House.
Lloyd has called for making private broadcasting companies pay licensing fees equal to their total operating costs to allow public broadcasting outlets to spend the same on their operations as the private companies do. This policy would essentially take all the profit out of running a private radio station. The purpose of this according to supporters, is to promote diversity and pay for educational programming by revamping the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is a non-profit entity created by Congress. In fiscal 2009 it received $400 million from the government. Lloyd believes, and I quote, “This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. Funding should not come from congressional appropriations. Sponsorship should be prohibited at all public broadcasters.” He also believes in regulating content on both public and private broadcast stations.
The result of all this government intervention would be a stifling of free speech on the airwaves. In particular conservative talk radio, which has dominated much of A.M. radio over the past couple of decades. The liberals realized that they couldn’t get the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” passed in Congress, so they’re making an end run around the Congress. The goal? To silence people like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and other conservatives that have been successful not only financially, but in swaying public opinion on such things as last year’s “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”, “Cap and Trade” and of course the current healthcare debate.
I disagree with Mr. Lloyd’s policies which I feel are an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment and which are clearly anti-capitalist. The airwaves belong to the people of this nation. Clearly the success of Rush, Levin and Hannity have shown that the people like these programs. And sponsors like advertising on these successful programs. By contrast, the failure of “Air America”, which was heavily funded by George Soros and featured such luminaries as Al Franken and Janeane Garofalo, would indicate that the American people don’t like what they’re peddling. There are at least a couple of liberal talk show hosts that have been successful, Alan Colmes probably being the best known. Colmes has said publicly that he opposes the Fairness Doctrine, so I would have to assume he would like Mr. Lloyd’s approach even less.
I have already personally written to my congressman, Florida Senator Bill Nelson and President Obama to urge them not to allow these policies to be enacted. I’ve also written to Mark Lloyd himself at the FCC to express my opposition. I would urge each of you to do the same and to encourage your friends and family as well. If this is allowed to happen, it will only be the beginning. How long before they’re taxing and regulating the Internet? How long before a show like the one you’re listening to is impossible to air?This is the sort of thing you’d expect to see in Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela or Castro’s Cuba, not in the United States of America. If it goes forward, then dissent against any government policy or administration will be stifled in a chilling way that can’t be allowed in a free republic.