BARACK OBAMA FORMALLY DECLARED SATURDAY on the steps of the old capitol building in Springfield, IL.  A nice crowd appeared to be on hand for the speech. I watched most of the speech, and the content was predictable. He emphasized hope and working together, but nobody ever pays attention to the content of any of Obama's speeches. Crowds become mesmerized by his rhetoric - similar to Bill Clinton - and it's all style in lieu of substance. That said, he is a good communicator.

Behind all the style lies a solid liberal in the eastern tradition. We all remember how eastern liberals have fared in recent national elections (Dukakis, Kerry) versus perceived moderate southern governors (Carter, Bill Clinton). The challenge for the Democrats is whether to follow the nutroots and nominate someone in the liberal form of Obama - politically-speaking - or someone with a more moderate Senator Clinton. Of course, Hillary's steady march to the left - especially on the war - may give a good indication where the national party is headed.

We've heard over and over that the country is evenly-divided. That is to say that in a presidential election, barring any sort of scandal, each candidate locks up its solid 45% and then fight over the remaining uncommitted 10%. It seems to me that Senator Clinton's call for President Bush to end the Iraq war before he leaves office in January 2009 will not resonate among the 10% located in the south. However, it's a moderate position compared to the "end the war now" positions of several of her opponents (Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama, Tom Vilsack).  

It will be interesting to see how the Democrat's race goes as we get closer to Iowa/New Hampshire/South Carolina in 2008. Obama has the media solidly in his corner, but he trails badly in just about every poll taken head-to-head against Sen. Clinton. We all remember how the Clinton machine works, and it will be interesting to see how the Clinton's handle a Obama surge in any poll.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

GOOD TO SEE THAT COLLEGE ATHLETICS are about student-athletes, teaching life's lessons, and not about money, correct? Take into account two separate incidents over the past few weeks. Gonzaga suspended two basketball players (Josh Heytvelt and Theo Davis) indefinately after their arrest on drug charges Friday. Heytvelt is one of the Zags' best players, but he was suspended after the arrest, despite claiming innocence. Coach Mark Few took the action without regard to winning and losing, and this is the correct action.

The second account is up in North Dakota and its men's hockey team. After a weekend in which they crushed my Minnesota Golden Gophers, three players, Robbie Bina, T.J. Oshie, and Jonathan Toews, got into an incident in a Grand Forks bar in which Oshie and Toews (both underage) were cited. Bina apparently tried to free the other two from the back of a squad car, and was charged with impeding a police investigation. Oh, and Bina was under probation for DUI! The school issued statements from each of the players and coach Dave Hakstol said the players would be subject to team disciplinary matters. Oshie and Toews are both first-round NHL draft picks and Bina is one of the team's veterans.

All three played in this weekend's games against MSU-Mankato, and each registered points in both games (except for Oshie on Saturday). I guess that these players will be disciplined at a time where games do not count in the standings!

WILLIAM ARKIN WROTE AN ONLINE COLUMN on the Washington Post site which cannot be described as anything but anti-military. Arkin is the paper's "National and Homeland Security" online writer, and by all accounts is a typical lefty. His contempt for the American military cannot be described without highlighting key passages from his site (taken directly from the OpinionJournal's "Best of the Web" update this afternoon):  
    

    
NOW, HUGH HEWITT hit him pretty hard this afternoon with Mark Steyn on his radio program and with a posting on www.hughhewitt.com. Also, James Lileks did a brilliant smackdown of his silly argument on www.lileks.com. I could only hope to be as pithy and witty as Lileks's analysis. There is no need to re-hash the absurdity of Arkin's posting, although the slip of mercenary is simply appalling.

HOWEVER, ARKIN'S WRITING represents a point of view possessed by several within the MSM. Arkin is probably not un-American or un-patriotic. In his response posting after the initial post slamming the military, Arkin cited a great deal of messages received from irate readers accusing him as such. Doing this only gives guys like Arkin cover. The easiest thing in the world is accusing him of being un-patriotic and un-American when writing something as ridiculous as he wrote. He can effectively portray opponents as typical "right-wing nuts," and continue on his merry military-bashing way. What Arkin is, and what many in the MSM represent, is a sort of elitist, "we know better than you," contempt for America and its military. Instead of acknowledging mistakes in Iraq, yet reporting on the progress (yes, there is some) made there, Arkin and others throw Abu Ghraib and Haditha in everyone's face as examples of, "Look! America's the problem; not the solution!" rhetoric.

WHAT RIGHT-THINKING SUPPORTERS OF THE MILITARY can continue to do is support our troops monetarily and morally, pressure Congress not to adopt defeatist resolutions, and pressure the Washington Post to fire Arkin and like-minded agenda "journalists." Of course, as evidenced by newspapers' rapidly-declining subscription and advertising revenues, Americans are voting with their feet and pocketbooks against shoddy agenda journalism, brilliantly displayed by William Arkin.

SENATOR JOE BIDEN (DE) is simply the gift which keeps on giving. Just when you are starting to feel sorry to be a Republican, complete with members of the supposedly "serious on national security party" seemingly tripping over one another in order to support defeatism in Iraq, Biden opens his mouth and trashes his fellow 2008 Democratic Presidential contenders.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards are not safe from Biden's attacks. In an interview preceding a story by Jason Horowitz of The New York Observer (I found this linked at www.foxnews.com this afternoon, and thus cite it accordingly), Biden has the following nuggets of insight:   

• Obama - "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
• Clinton - “From the part of Hillary’s proposal, the part that really baffles me is, ‘We’re going to teach the Iraqis a lesson.’ We’re not going to equip them? OK. Cap our troops and withdraw support from the Iraqis? That’s a real good idea.”......" “Everyone in the world knows her. Her husband has used every single legitimate tool in his behalf to lock people in, shut people down. Legitimate. And she can’t break out of 30 percent for a choice for Democrats?"
• Edwards - "I don't think John Edwards knows what the heck he is talking about."...."like so much Fluffernutter out there." (referring to Edwards' position on Iraq).

THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO GET OUT OF THE GATE! This guy actually ran for President before (1988), and should, theoretically, know what he's doing. However, he seems to be trying a new dynamic and using a "slash-and-burn" tactic against members of his own party. I guess the Democrats do not have an equivalent to Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment ("Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican)."

BIDEN SIMPLY DOES NOT GET IT. Not on the war, not on presidential campaigns, and not on much. Hugh Hewitt does not refer to him as "Slow Joe" for nothing. Behind all the rhetoric - and believe me, I want him on the air 24/7 because he makes our case for free - is a typical defeatist Democrat who cannot be trusted while at war.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

AL FRANKEN DECLARED HIS CANDIDACY FOR Norm Coleman's Senate seat in Minnesota today. Yawn! However, Coleman's teetering on the edge of being a defeatist Republican is certainly not helping his fundraising chances. A position on the resolutions may not hurt him in a run against Al Franken, as Republicans aren't likely to cross over to vote for Franken and his "withdraw now" stance in Iraq. However, Coleman needs to get his act together and fast! Good thing he's a dynamic fundraiser and terrific campaigner because he'll need to beat the DFL machine here in Minnesota, complete with its surrogates in both major newspapers and each Minneapolis/St. Paul TV station, along with the out-of-state Hollywood money. I'd say Franken doesn't have a chance, but we are 8 1/2 years removed from electing Jesse Ventura governor.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

MOLLY IVINS DIED TODAY at age 62 after a third bout with breast cancer. She was a passionate liberal, although mean-spirited in her hatred of both President Bushes. R.I.P.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

NOT TO TOOT MY OWN HORN, but did I not call the Timberwolves' loss to Sacramento tonight? At least, the Gopher men's basketball team won against Northwestern - first time in 7 tries.

THE RACE FOR 2008 is off and running and the field is rapidly-expanding. Gone are the days in which a candidate can wait passively on the sidelines and allow his or her rivals to slug it out in the primary process before stating intentions (i.e. Richard Nixon, 1968). Today, fundraising is king, with public exposure a distant second. If a candidate cannot prove that he can raise enough money early on in the process, he can surmise that only he and his mother feel he would make a good president.

The Republicans seeking the 2008 nomination can be divided into the following factions:  

• The Front-Runners - Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Senator John McCain (Arizona), Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney
• The Long-Shots - Senator Sam Brownback (Kansas), Huckabee, Congressman Duncan Hunter (California), Congressman Tom Tancredo (Colorado), Former Wisconsin Governor and former Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson
• The "Maybes" - Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
• The "RINO" (Republican in Name Only) Candidate - Senator Chuck Hagel (Nebraska)

RUDY GIULIANI IS ARGUABLY THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE MOST LIKELY TO WIN in 2008. In early polling numbers (polls conducted by Time, CNN, ABC/Washington Post, Gallup, and Zogby, and courtesy of realclearpolitics.com) , the former New York City Mayor enjoys leads in a field including John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich. In other polls, he helps turn traditional blue states red head-to-head against Hillary Clinton (Quinnipiac University poll, with a HT to Scot Lehigh of the Boston Globe). The Mayor enjoys wide appeal largely because of his image as a crime fighter as a New York prosecutor and later as its mayor. New York's sharp decrease in violent crime under his administration drew national attention, but it was his performance during and after the September 11 attacks which cemented his place as "America's Mayor." Giuliani demonstrated a reassuring, yet take-charge, demeanor which helped the city recover. He is viewed as a strong advocate of the global war on terror (GWOT). However, the big question concerning a Giuliani candidacy is his baggage (three marriages and two messy and public divorces) and his support of issues contrary to the social conservative base (gun control, civil unions, abortion). The Mayor's fundraising capabilities are tremendous, he is a dynamic public speaker, and he can rally the base. The question for 2008 is will the social conservatives ignore "Giuliani the social liberal" and pull the lever for "Giuliani the strong and steadfast leader?" 

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN HAS ACHIEVED FRONT-RUNNER STATUS largely because of his favorable coverage in the mainstream media (MSM), although that position may be eroding. Once upon a time, nary a night passed when stories about McCain the "maverick" weren't blasted across the network news. One moment you saw McCain leading the "Gang of 14" bi-partisan panel of Senators reaching compromise on judicial filibusters. The next moment, you saw him criticizing Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. McCain used to be the MSM's favorite Senator because he was likely to be against the administration's policies on a number of issues. Now, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is looking to challenge for that status. Despite his frequent criticisms of the Bush administration, McCain is somewhat tolerable to the GOP base because of his largely steadfast support of the GWOT. However, should he support the Biden/Warner resolution, or seek any deal to weaken it (i.e. timelines, benchmarking, etc.), his chance of securing the base - especially among the conservatives - will be substantially weakened.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY IS THE CANDIDATE closest to the Reagan wing of the Republican party who seemingly has a chance to win the nomination. Governor Romney comes with an extremely successful business record, and his favorable public image as rescuing the Salt Lake Olympic Committee from fundraising shortages and scandal was well-deserved. The 2002 Salt Lake games were a huge commercial success, and helped catapult Romney into the governor's mansion in Massachusetts. Governing perhaps the most blue state in the union and saddled with a Democratic legislature, Romney produced balanced budgets without tax increases. He stood firm in his opposition to gay marriage and civil unions, and won support from social conservatives nationwide. Leaving office still popular, Romney has jumped full-tilt into his candidacy. He is likely the most technologically-savvy of the serious GOP candidates. His web-based "Mitt TV" clearly ahead of his challengers and embraces the online community in a way which was so effective for Howard Dean in 2004. Romney's biggest question, however, is his religious faith. A Mormon has never been a serious contender for either major party's nomination, and there are Republicans who simply will not vote for a Mormon to be President. This clear religious bigotry does affect how the primary races will turn out, and it should be interesting how the other candidates treat this "issue." It is clear that Romney's challengers have already begun to take his candidacy seriously - see the YouTube video of Romney's Senate run against Ted Kennedy in 1994 where he waffles on his abortion stance (he has recently reaffirmed his "pro life" stance, and stated that he changed his mind).

OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES, the "maybe" candidates, Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich, are the most intriguing. Bush has stated repeatedly that he is not running in 2008, but he would arguably be the most talented and qualified candidate in the field. He management of Florida through difficult financial times and natural disasters casts him in a positive public light. He easily won re-election in 2002 against a strong in an environment where the Democrats spent millions in soft money to defeat him. The biggest problem with Bush is his last name. America would have to ask itself if it is prepared to witness a Bush dynasty. If his last name were "Johnson," he would almost undoubtedly be the front-runner in 2008. As for Gingrich, the former Speaker has indicated that he will not make a decision until next year whether or not to run. He will continue with his grassroots internet-based forum where he will explore his options without officially declaring his candidacy. He enjoys solid support during the January polls mentioned earlier within the GOP field, and is seen as a solid conservative and "Victory Republican." He also has past marital issues, and one can only imagine how many times we will hear the terms "impeachment" and "government shutdown" during a 2008 race featuring Gingrich. All other candidates listed above have no chance at the nomination, and their candidacies are seen as being about one issue (Tancredo and immigration), securing the VP slot (Huckabee), and meglomania (Hagel). 

It will be interesting as we head into the election cycle. Keep in mind, it is less than 12 months until the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, and 12 months is an absolute eternity.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Later this week, I will look into the Democrats' muddied field and provide my quick analysis. Periodically through the cycle, I will provide analysis and see who jumps from "maybe" to "front-runner" and vice-versa.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Congratulations to the Timberwolves who ended Phoenix's 17-game winning streak last night. KG had himself a monster game. They're now back to .500 at 22-22, and are a lock to lose tomorrow night at home against Sacramento. This is a total letdown team!

Sorry for the delay since my last post, but I'm trying to get this blogging thing down. I can't get my URL link to work, and I'm still working at linking to other articles/posts effectively. I appreciate your patience throughout this initial process and ask you to chalk up any errors as "rookie mistakes."
___________________________________________________________________________

My beloved Golden Gopher hockey gang did a nice disappearing act this weekend, got themselves swept by North Dakota at home, and dropped from the top ranking to #3. Hopefully, this is a bottoming-out period in which they will go through their doldrums in January this year instead of March (like last year; insert Holy Cross joke here). The road to recovery begins in Anchorage, Alaska this weekend in the persona of the UAA Seawolves.
___________________________________________________________________________

I'll be back tomorrow with a posting about the ever-growing '08 Presidential field. Until then, R.I.P., Barbaro.

For expert analysis of the President's State of the Union, check www.realclearpolitics.com. Of course, my local newspaper (Star Tribune) did not like it. If they did like anything the President said or did, I would be concerned.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The non-binding resolution the US Senate will be considering, criticizing the commitment of 21,000 additional troops to Iraq, is garnering a lot of attention, and for good reason. Over at www.hughhewitt.com, Hugh is very adamant that GOP Senators who support this resolution, or any subsequent one, will not be forgotten on his show, and will have absolutely no chance at winning reelection in the future.

It appears that virtually all Democrat Senators will support this resolution. Disappointing is the support it is receiving from GOP'ers (Warner, Snowe, Brownback, Collins, Smith, Coleman). Norm Coleman should know better. I appreciate the fact he is in a difficult position, given that a good number of the 21,000 troops will come from Minnesota. However, he is a responsible voice in the Senate on the war, and has not wavered in his support in the past. Plus, he will be in a reelection fight in 2008 against the likes of Al Franken. Along with Gordon Smith, Coleman will face perhaps the stiffest challenge in holding a seat in a state which is purple, at best. Alienating the base of his party, not to mention bunkering in with the cut-and-run crowd, won't help his chances.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

You will find out that I am a sports fanatic. My loyalties are primarily limited to the Minnesota Twins, New York Yankees, University of Minnesota Men's Hockey team, and the New York Islanders. However, during the past season, I have become more of Minnesota Timberwolves' fan, mostly because I love watching Kevin Garnett play. Therefore, I have watched more T-Wolves' games the past year than in all other years combined.

The team fired its coach, Dwane Casey, yesterday with a 20-20 record. Although the team has been maddeningly inconsistent all season long, it has a roster which is ill-suited to having a .500 record. The team has 7 guards and 5 small forward types, yet Casey has somehow managed to get this team to play well at times. No more evident is the play of center Mark Blount, who is among the league's leaders in field goal percentage, after several teams and coaches have grown frustrated with his lack of production.

Casey got fired yesterday because his team was inconsistent. The wrong man was fired. Kevin McHale, the man who assembled the cast of misfits, should have been dismissed. I'm not saying Casey is without fault. However, some culpability has to fall upon McHale. After all, he's the one who stockpiled the 7 guard roster, traded for and signed Marko Jaric long-term (and is now trying to get rid of him for nothing, after giving up Sammy Cassell AND a first-rounder), lost another first-rounder in last year's Wally Szczerbiak trade, has lost (Joe Smith deal) or given up 5 first-rounders in his regime, etc. The team fired the wrong guy, and they continue to drift without a compass.

Hello, and welcome to my blog!
 
I am honored to be a part of the Townhall.com family of blogs and humbled by the talented writers and commentators featured in this forum. This site will focus primarily on national politics, but will expose media bias, examine pop culture, opine on Minnesota politics, and pontificate on sports as well.
 
Again, welcome, and I look forward to your comments.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

PRESIDENT BUSH'S State of the Union Address featured the President at his best. Serious in demeanor, he calmly laid out his agenda for the upcoming year. While the initiatives making up the first half of his speech were important the real meat was found in the sections on security and diplomacy. Security continues to be the main concern of this Administration, and with good reason.

Here, President Bush was firm and resolute, encouraging Senators to allow his new course of action in Iraq (Troop escalation in Baghdad and Anbar) an opportunity to work. On the diplomatic front, he rightly pointed out that terrorist groups took actions in 2006 designed to reverse democratic pushes of 2005 (Iraq, Lebanon, etc.).  Also, Bush showed his commitment to humanitarian causes in Africa, by pushing Congress to continue its efforts to fight HIV/AIDS as well as asking for $1.2B over the next five years to combat malaria on the continent. The President is clearly in his element when discussing security and diplomacy - I only wish he would do this more often!

On the other, less important, side, I especially liked his overview of the "jobless recovery" economy. We are currently through 41 consecutive months of expansion, have created 7M new jobs during that time, have seen wages increase and unemployment decrease. Hard to believe Democrats were so successful in painting a doom and gloom picture with those figures behind the GOP. The balancing of the federal budget within the next 5 years was popular on both sides of the aisle, but Democrats seemed skeptical of doing so without raising taxes. Earmark reform is a true crowd-pleaser, as is the preservation of entitlements (more on these in a later post, I'm sure).

Other topics included education (re-authorize "No Child Left Behind"), immigration (Look for ways to continue to enforce borders; deal with illegals already here "without animosity and amnesty"), energy (Reduce dependence upon foreign oil; "20/10-" reducing fossil fuel consumption by 20% in next 10 years; implement fuel efficiency standards similar to light trucks to all cars), and judges (Prompt up-or-down votes on federal appeals court judges in limbo). Camera views of Sens. Clinton and Leahy throughout the speech showed disinterest and sometimes, laughter.

All said, the speech was certainly vintage George W. Bush. He'll never be confused for a Reagan or a Clinton in how he can captivate an audience. However, his seriousness during these serious times offered a reassuring message. His ending quote, "The state of our Union is strong; our cause is right; and tonight, the cause goes on."