Biden, eh?

When in doubt, when running a presidential campaign let the news of your VP choice come out 2am (east coast) on a Friday night so no one can ask any questions until we’ve all had our coffee Monday morning. This way, when those questions come out you can say “oh, that’s old news. Time to move on.”

So, I’ll ask a few questions:

Will the questions about McCain’s age stop now that Obama has an old man on the ticket? (Biden is 65)

Can Biden clarify his statement dealing with Obama’s qualifications to be president? (Biden suggested Obama is unqualified)

Why isn’t Biden on top of the ticket and the pretty face rookie on the bottom?

Is it change or is it politics as usual for Senator Biden? (Change is a big deal to Obama but Biden has been in the Senate since the Vietnam war.)

Who will plagiarize more, Biden or Obama?

Seriously, 2AM?

How much pork is Biden responsible for?

How long will his speech at the DNC be?

Will we have to hear him often?

Will steroids become an issue in the campaign?

Is Biden really one of the ones we’ve been waiting for? Really?

Captain Bogs Adds: Will Biden and Obama share notes on plastic surgeons?

From the Notebook

-The latest Twins Roundtable is up; Josh Taylor, Andrew Kneeland and I field four questions dealing with the Minnesota Twins.

-As part of the Great Books of the Western World (GBWW) ten year reading plan, I had to tackle John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government. Locke was one of the political philosophers the founders used to create their (ahem, our) government. As with so many of these books, I have little to add. I felt Locke’s case for majority democratic rule through an elected legislature weak as he never completely fleshed out exactly how “consent” of the governed created a mandate for rule (even limited rule as Locke proposes). That aside, the 2nd treatise is a necessary read for any eligible voter in the American Republic.

-Read through the U.S. Constitution, the Articles of Confederation and the Declaration of Independence. Two of three are on the GBWW reading list and I had never gotten around to reading the articles of confederation. Reading them all together you really see how incredible a document the Declaration is, how truly amateurish the Confederation was, and how…er…can I use “wonderful” in describing the Constitution? Something I thought funny, when they ratified the Articles of Confederation they must have been really desperate to get Canada into the Union (described as a “perpetual union” in the Confederation, take that Jefferson Davis). Again, whether or not you’re on the GBWW reading list, take the time to look at these founding documents regularly.

-Finally finished Robin Rowland’s “The Creative Guide to Research” after 8 years of lugging this book around. Once upon a time I was killing time in a public library for some reason, and decided a book on research would be good for a prospective college student. After getting 100 or so pages into the book, I wrote down the author and title and put it under the “revisit” category. A few years later, I bought the book used from ABEBooks and got another 80 or so pages into it. Found it last week in a box with the bookmark still in it and decided to take care of this once and for all. Well, don’t waste your time. There are some insightful tidbits regarding Freedom of Information searches and some of the basics of archive and library research but the World Wide Web and its wikipedias and blogs and forums and search engines and Google completely make 99% of the material in this title obsolete. In fact, the cover brags about the online component of this book and in the introduction it’s described as a research guide for the next millennium. Note to self: No grandiose claims in book introductions.

-Since I graduated from college I’ve been semi-secretly attempting to write a novel. Not for any reason other than I’d like to add some fiction to my writing resume. “How to Write a Novel in 100 Days” by John Coyne was really just another somewhat useful resource in fiction writing. Worth a look see for interested parties but there is simply no easy way to write a salable novel. It’s a lot of hard work.

-Normally I don’t talk about my blog to co-workers, employers or the people I deal with on a day to day basis. But with the convention coming up I’ve found myself trying to explain to people what a “blog” is, why I do it and why my blog is worthy of special press credentials. I only have a believable answer to one of those questions. Maybe someday in the next life I’ll have to explain to Ninian Winzet what a blog is and how it was sorta like what he did in his life.

An Artist?

Serious Artist
Take Your Secret Self 1 Step Beyond today!
Created with Rum and Monkey‘s Personality Test Generator.

Going 1 step beyond I wear a beret and stand in doorways. I smoke for the way it looks. Your life is stupid and shallow and all the truth you can find in the world equals one big lie. Relationships are illusions and you mean nothing to me. My art is everything whether anyone understands it or not. It isn’t my fault you don’t get it. Take my picture and I spit upon you. I don’t know why. I have immaculate hair. Nothing matters.

From Mr.D.

Twins Roundtable

Special thanks to Andrew Kneeland and Josh Taylor for doing the roundtable this week.

1) Recently the Star Tribune reported that the Twins were trying to acquire Jarrod Washburn from the Seattle Mariners. The deal fell through when the Mariners tried to get too much for Washburn, who has been unimpressive this year. Does this event tell us a lot about Twins GM Bill Smith or is its significance being exaggerated in the Twins blogesphere?

Andrew Kneeland: I really haven’t made that much of a deal out of it at all. I think it is being over-dramatized and is really just another attempt by the Twins to mess with others’ heads. It must have worked.

Josh Taylor: While I was incredibly disturbed by the talk of the Twins acquiring Washburn, the most important thing about this is that the Twins ended up not making a deal with the Mariners and their delusional front office. Washburn costs too much for a mediocre pitcher, and the Twins would have been saddled with him through next season. While I can understand (while disagreeing with) the justification for adding Washburn and shifting a starter to the bullpen for the rest of THIS season, there are other, better ways to fix the bullpen problem going into 2009. Washburn would have been the wrong fix for this team, and would have just taken up the space of a better starter in 2009. That said, the Twins front office was trying to find a solution to what has turned into a very serious problem, so I guess I can’t fault them for that. Assuming the reports are true, however, this was a very significant issue and extensive discussion about it by members of the blogosphere is both expected and appropriate.

Marty Andrade: The Twins front office has made a number of blunders this year along with a spattering of brilliant moves which defy their modus operandi. The Twins signed veteran hitter Craig Monroe along with veteran pitcher Livan Hernandez for millions of dollars, then they dropped those two players later in the season. Randy Ruiz, a ten year veteran of the minor leagues but who had never made an appearance in the majors, replaced Monroe; while the 2006 phenom Francisco Liriano replaced the terrible Livan. The Ruiz move was completely unexpected, and the willingness of the front office to go with unproven players in the middle of a playoff race should be commended.

What the Washburn deal shows me is despite some of the moves Bill Smith has made, he still doesn’t even attempt to use objective criteria (read: advanced sabremetrics) to rate players. He also allowed Chad Bradford to be claimed by another team after suggesting Bradford wouldn’t be an upgrade over current personnel in the Twins bullpen. These are big mistakes in my book. I’ll give Bill Smith the benefit of the doubt for the moment; we need a few years to see what kind of GM he’ll be.

2) Speaking of the Twins blogesphere, has the online world been unfair towards the Twins’ top brass and is it getting too negative?

AK: I think they have. As the cliche goes, “give someone a blog and they know everything.” Second-guessing is what some people live by. Most bloggers wouldn’t have anything to blog about if not for mistakes made by the team. As far as the top brass goes, I am personally pretty upset with them for not making any move at the deadline, but I give them credit for being better baseball minds than I. After all, how else would they get the job they have, (besides marriage)?

JT: Unfair? Too Negative? We’re talking about the blogosphere, right? Isn’t the pretty much most blogger’s stock-in-trade? I honestly don’t read many blogs, because I don’t usually have time to do more than write for my own. I have no idea how negative people have been getting. I personally give Bill Smith a passing grade but not a spectacular one. The decisions made in free agency were dreadful, and I’m concerned about rumblings (such as the Washburn discussion above) that surface from time to time. However, Smith pulled off the best deal possible with Santana (and more importantly had the guts to make what was a necessary move) while letting Torii Hunter and Carlos Silva go and signing Joe Nathan long-term. His moves have the Twins tied for first as I write this. Too much negativity is unwarranted. Smith has made some mistakes, in my opinion, but overall he appears to be a very competent GM. If people are continuously blasting him (as they often do with Gardy), it’s unwarranted.

MA: One of the regular criticisms of the blogesphere is the ubiquitous negativity. However, anyone who has ever read a local sports columnist for any period of time will know, negativity is everywhere in sports media.

3) As the Twins continue to battle the White Sox for top place in the AL Central, what are the Twins greatest strengths and weaknesses? And the White Sox?

AK: The Twins weakness is obviously relif pitching with. I think September will bring with it more ease for the relievers, but I wouldn’t expect a major drop in production/statistics. The Twins strength is their offense. They have some of the best bats in the league in Mauer, Morneau, and now possibly even Young and Kubel.

The White Sox also have great bats. They can hit a thousand home runs a night and still have some power left in the tank. That will lead people, myself included, to believe that a team that lives and dies by the long ball will certainly fade, but the White Sox haven’t. Yet. The glaring weakness of this team is starting pitching and their bullpen. To be honest, I don’t know how Chicago is still in the AL Central race with a pitching staff like theirs. Once the batting fades, the whole team will practically disappear. At least, that is the way it goes in my dreams.

JT: I continue to think that the Twins greatest strength is the young starting pitching. While there are occasional lapses (as with all starters), overall you can expect to get 6-7 reasonably solid innings out of them. The greatest weakness right now is unquestionably the bullpen, and not much elaboration is needed. As for the White Sox, if I were a fan of theirs I’d be concerned about the rotation. I realize that sounds a bit strange when Danks (3.11), Floyd (3.75), and Buehrle (3.77) all have been really good this year, and when Vazquez (4.34) has been no slouch, but I think that Danks and Floyd are overperforming, and Buehrle is something of a time bomb. Strengths — how about MVP candidate Carlos Quentin, who seems to do everything for that squad?

MA: For the Twins, the offense has been the big surprise. July and August have seen the Twins rank in 6th and 5th respectively in OPS in the AL. They’re ranked 8th overall for the year. For a team which has historically had problems with offense, scoring runs is what has made this playoff run possible. The Twins rank in the bottom third of AL teams in ERA. Both the bullpen and the starting rotation has been below average.

The White Sox don’t have any real weaknesses, and their bullpen is their greatest strength. It ranks 3rd in ERA in the AL.

4) Name the impact September call-up. Who will help the Twins the most?

AK: Bobby Korecky, but I hope he is brought up before September.

JT: I don’t think there is a true “impact” guy who is going to step in and change the complexion of the season. Any competent reliever who can get some outs in the 6th and 7th, though, would be welcome. Bobby Korecky is probably that guy.

MA: Yadda Yadda, Bobby Korecky. He’s a reliable middle reliever and it’s quite annoying to see him continue to perform well in the minors while our bullpen struggles.

Wednesday Hero

Pvt. Nathan Z. Thacker
18 years old from Greenbrier, Arkansas
2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division
October 12, 2007

Pvt. Nathan Z. Thacker had only been in the country for two weeks before his death, according to the soldier’s father, Stephen Thacker.

Thacker’s father said his son felt a duty to enlist. “He said it was his job. Even after he got his orders that he was going over there, he said it’s his job.”

Thacker had attended Guy-Perkins High School in Guy, Arkansas. He earned his GED in 2006, his father said. Thacker enlisted in the Army in April 2007 and completed his training at Fort Benning, Ga. He arrived at Fort Drum in August 2007. His honors include the Purple Heart.

“Nathan was an excellent man,” sister Sabrina Black said. “He loved me, I loved him, and I’d give anything to have him back.”

Pvt. Thacker was killed when an IED was detonated near his vehicle near Kirkuk. Three other soldiers were injured in the attack.

Pvt. Thacker is survived by his parents, siblings and his grandfather.

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.

We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Random Link o’ the Day:

http://noteviljustwrong.com/

Random Link o’ the Day:

http://www.diversitylane.com/

The Twins Podcast is Up

Seth Stohs and Jeff Straub (former Twins Podcaster) joined me for an hour long conversation dealing with all things Twins.

From the Notebook

-The Twins Podcast is up, Seth Stohs and Jeff Straub were my only guests. The podcasts are getting a little better each time, and we’re having fun doing them. Really, that’s all that matters. The podcast is live every Sunday at 8pm CT. No, there are no transcripts of the podcast (someone actually googled this site looking for transcripts of my podcasts)

-Count me among those who don’t care about Barack’s past drug use.

-Franken’s Senate bid could be so much stronger if he had better campaign strategists, I’m certain. They’re missing several opportunities to score big against Coleman, yet they’re still pursuing the “lease” scandal. Right now I think Franken’s greatest weakness is that he doesn’t look “senatorial.” Were Franken to focus on creating the image of a statesman early in this campaign, Coleman could be in real trouble.

-A commercial I would love to see run: show all the people who are constitutionally qualified to be president and who have more experience than Barack Obama. Bascially, anyone who has an advanced degree, has held statewide elective office for 2 or more years and who also has 10 years of state level political experience. My guess is there has to be several hundred people to choose from (and this basically excludes Representatives).

-Tony Garcia, who went solo at KNSI after I left the show we co-hosted (formerly known as “Race to the Right”) is apparently no longer at KNSI. It’s at least on “hiatus.” It’s too bad, I was working to get on the show to promote my book. I left just about two years ago. Tony and I started out in 2004 together at the Patriot II, did “The Next Big Thing” competition at KSTP and produced just about a year’s worth of shows together at KNSI. I have no other details than what was in King’s post.

-I wasn’t sure when I was going to announce this, but I figured sooner was better than later. I was accepted into an MBA program at the Minnesota School of Business and will start their program September 29th. This will change my priorities concerning my online presence but I doubt I’ll stop blogging.

Obama and International Morals

Below is an interesting Obama response from the “unofficial transcript” of the Warren Church meeting between Obama and McCain. The emphasis is mine (and there’s not much I can do about the formatting outside of tediously changing every line, which I’m not going to do).

PASTOR RICK: WELCOME BACK TO THE SADDLEBACK CIVIL

6 FORUM ON THE PRESIDENCY. IN THIS LAST SESSION, I WANT US

7 TO TALK ABOUT AMERICA’S RESPONSIBILITY TO THE REST OF THE

8 WORLD. WE ARE THE MOST BLESSED NATION IN THE WORLD AND

9 WE’RE BLESSED TO BE A — BLESSING — REQUIRED SO LET’S

10 JUST GO DOWN SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, INTERNATIONAL ISSUES.

11 FIRST THING, LET’S JUST TALK ABOUT WAR. AS AN AMERICAN,

12 WHAT’S WORTH DYING FOR? WHAT’S WORTH HAVING SACRIFICE OF

13 AMERICAN LIVES FOR?

14 A WELL, OBVIOUSLY AMERICAN FREEDOM, AMERICAN LIVES,

15 AMERICA’S NATIONAL INTERESTS. YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST WITH

16 MY FAMILY ON VACATION IN HAWAII, VISITED THE PLACE WHERE

17 MY GRANDFATHER IS LAID TO REST, THE PUNCHBOWL NATIONAL

18 CEMETERY AND WENT OUT TO ARIZONA, OUT IN PEARL HARBOR AND

19 YOU KNOW YOU ARE REMINDED OF THE SACRIFICES THAT HAD BEEN

20 MADE ON BEHALF OF OUR FREEDOM AND I THINK THAT IS A SOLEMN

21 OBLIGATION THAT WE ALL HAVE. I THINK WE ALSO HAVE FORGED

22 ALLIANCES WITH COUNTRIES, NATO BEING A PRIME EXAMPLE WHERE

23 WE HAVE PLEDGED TO ACT MILITARILY FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE

24 THAT IS IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST AND THAT IS SOMETHING I

25 THINK WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY.

1

1 Q WHAT WOULD BE THE CRITERIA THAT YOU WOULD COMMIT

2 TROOPS TO END THE GENOCIDE, FOR INSTANCE, LIKE WHAT’S

3 GOING ON IN DARFUR OR COULD HAPPEN IN GEORGIA OR ANYWHERE

4 ELSE, A MASS KILLING?

5 A I DON’T THINK THAT THERE IS A HARD AND FAST LINE

6 AT WHICH YOU SAY, OKAY, WE ARE GOING IN. I THINK IT IS

7 ALWAYS A JUDGMENT CALL. I THINK THAT THE BASIC PRINCIPLE

8 HAS TO BE THAT IF WE HAVE IT WITHIN OUR POWER TO PREVENT

9 MASS KILLING AND GENOCIDE AND WE CAN WORK IN CONCERT WITH

10 THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TO PREVENT IT THEN WE SHOULD

11 ACT. NOW, WE HAVE TO DO SO — WE HAVE TO DO SO I THINK

12 THAT INTERNATIONAL COMPONENT IS VERY CRITICAL. WE’RE

13 NOT — WE MAY NOT GET 100 PERCENT AGREEMENT, BUT —

14 Q — GO TO THE WAR WITHOUT APPROVAL?

15 A YES, BUT I THINK YOU TAKE AN EXAMPLE LIKE BOSNIA

16 WHEN WE WENT IN AND UNDOUBTEDLY SAVED LIVES. WE DID NOT

17 HAVE YOU UN APPROVAL BUT THERE WAS A STRONG INTERNATIONAL

18 CASE THAT HAD BEEN MADE THAT ETHNIC CLEANSING WAS TAKING

19 PLACE. AND UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN WE HAVE, WITHIN

20 OUR POWER, WE SHOULD — YOU KNOW WE SHOULD TAKE ACTION.

It’s probably miraculous Obama would admit the United States is justified taking action, at all, without international approval. However, he still obviously holds international opinion quite high.

I have two problems with his position. Firstly, if an action is justified, such as preventing a genocide from occurring, what effect then does international opinion have? The “international community” sat on the sidelines during the Rwandan genocide and allowed hundreds of thousands of people to be murdered. Of what value can we obtain from the opinions of people who collectively failed to take just action in the face of terrible crimes against humanity?

It’s fallacy to look towards the collective opinions of the leaders of nations in ascertaining “agreement” for an action you believe justified. Sure, their agreement is nice, and their help would be a bonus, but to make decisions based on international popularity is a crippling requirement of action. Other nations have their own interests and motivations. Rwanda was sort of a sore spot for the Belgians and UN engagement there would have been an embarrassment.

Simply put, acting or not acting is a decision which needs to be based on the merits of the situation, not on the whims of whomever the Europeans happen to have put in office in any given year.

My other problem with his statement is it puts American interests into the hands of European leaders. A president needs to have the freedom to take actions necessary for the best interests of the American public regardless of international opinion. We can’t defer to other nations when there are national security concerns at stake in a given situation. To do so will be to cede American sovereignty to the world at large.