Wednesday
Vegetable harvest times
a handy chart from King County mapping out when various vegetables get harvested in the Puget Sound area - buy local/buy fresh.
Al La Spada on UWTV
Al La Spada gave the Laboratory Medicine Grand Rounds and it is now on UWTV, for those interested in what goes on in my professional life.
veepstakes
Now that each political party's presidential candidate is all-but decided, comes the speculative, tea leaf-reading season of the veepstakes. Who will each candidate choose to be #2? What are the driving factors? Will it be Obama/Clinton as has been the buzz since Clinton first seemed bested by Obama in late February?
The Politico's Jonathan Martin wrote a piece about it today. Over at the TPMCafé they've got a speculative comments section to which every joe-schmo is posting their choice(s). MSNBC even has a bracket (similar to those employed in the NCAA tourneys) - though, presently only for the Republican VP spot, since the Dem race isn't 'officially' over yet.
Want my thoughts? Of course you do, that's why you're here:
The goal for each candidate in choosing a VP candidate is to minimize potential electoral weaknesses. One of John McCain's biggest political liabilities in this election cycle is his close relationship with George W. Bush. Therefore he's going to have to alienate his base and choose someone more moderate/liberal/critical of the Bush administration to round out the ticket and distance himself from President 27%-approva-rating (lowest in recorded history). Who do I think that could be? I'm going to float the four potentials that (IMHO) would be the most beneficial to the McCain ticket:
The Politico's Jonathan Martin wrote a piece about it today. Over at the TPMCafé they've got a speculative comments section to which every joe-schmo is posting their choice(s). MSNBC even has a bracket (similar to those employed in the NCAA tourneys) - though, presently only for the Republican VP spot, since the Dem race isn't 'officially' over yet.
Want my thoughts? Of course you do, that's why you're here:
The goal for each candidate in choosing a VP candidate is to minimize potential electoral weaknesses. One of John McCain's biggest political liabilities in this election cycle is his close relationship with George W. Bush. Therefore he's going to have to alienate his base and choose someone more moderate/liberal/critical of the Bush administration to round out the ticket and distance himself from President 27%-approva-rating (lowest in recorded history). Who do I think that could be? I'm going to float the four potentials that (IMHO) would be the most beneficial to the McCain ticket:
- Bobby Jindal (LA governor) - major up-and-comer in the Republican party, likely nominee in 2012 or 2016, though his age (almost 37) might highlight one of McCain's bigger weaknesses - his age (almost 72)
- Condoleezza Rice (Sec. State) - would be another link to the Bush WH, but she is seen as strong on foreign policy and would be an interesting choice for the McCain campaign
- Joe Lieberman (CT senator, Dem) - Lieberman has been 'campaigning' with McCain this spring and has echoed (almost) everyone one of the McCain talking points (especially those criticizing Obama), in addition a choice of a noted Dem (and one that was on the Dem ticket in 2000) would be seen as a 'bipartisan' move, though Lieberman has been all-but excommunicated from the Democratic party at this point; this potential choice is one that scares me the most
- Mike Huckabee (AK governor) - would consolidate the religious right around McCain (finally), though probably doesn't bring much more than that
- Colin Powell (fmr. Sec. State) - Powell would be an interesting choice as he wouldn't help to distance McCain from the Bush WH very much, though Powell has been a dissenting voice to the Bush administration and might (oddly) help draw that distinction more clearly; it could also completely backfire on McCain
- Other names are out there (FL gov Crist and Mitt Romney, for example), but these are the ones that I think might give McCain the best shot... though I don't really understand the Republican party as well as I understand the Democrats...
- John Edwards - not going to happen, pipe dream; strong ticket but with his wife being ill I doubt Edwards is willing to campaign.
- Jim Webb (VA senator) - tough to pull a D out of the senate, strong military background and 'straight shooter' image; potential negative is that he's seen as a bit of a misogynist by some which wouldn't help unify the Clintonites with the rest of the party (true or not)
- Tim Kaine (VA governor) - as with Webb, would help in VA (a potential battleground state) but doesn't have the downside of losing a strong D senator
- Kathleen Sebelius (KS governor) - again, pluses are that she's a governor, an up-and-comer, and a woman; she doesn't help much on the foreign policy front
- Janet Napolitano (AZ governor) - similar pluses as Sebelius, though she doesn't bring geography (with McCain expected with win AZ pretty handily)
- Joe Biden (DE senator) - strong candidate with lots of experience, he'd take a strong voice away from the senate where some are thinking he could be majority leader come 2009
- Bill Richardson (NM governor) - again, that he's a popular governor in a potential battleground state is a huge plus, also he's Hispanic (thus potentially helping Obama with a demographic that he's had trouble with), and he's got lots of 'experience' (serving in the Clinton WH), though little in foreign policy.
- Wes Clark (ret four-star general) - Clark is my current favorite among this list; he's about as strong as the come in foreign and military policy (having been the Supreme Allied Commander in the Kosovo war in the 90's), he's also been a staunch opponent of the Iraq war since the beginning (like Obama), he's a Clintonite (and could be seen as a move to unify the party); the only real downside is that he hasn't been through many campaigns and so is a little more wet-behind-the-ears to be on a national ticket, but I think that the Obama campaign can groom him to be quite successful, given their track record over the primary season
Friday
Recount
Lately I've been watching a lot of the The West Wing - it's been refreshing and hope-instilling, reminding me of what effective, open, honest governance can yield. It is also a fascinating show about politics and how political processes and governmental processes in this country operate.
Another bit of fictionalized politics that is coming out is Recount, HBO's movie that forces us all to relive the days after the 2000 Presidential Election to remember what happened in Florida, consider the motives and tactics in play, and think critically about how things resolved. From all accounts it is a fascinating take on recent political history - that is, if you can detach yourself from the subject matter enough to appreciate the story they are telling. Here's the trailer:
It premieres Sunday Night - I wish I had HBO... and a blanket to hide under.
Another bit of fictionalized politics that is coming out is Recount, HBO's movie that forces us all to relive the days after the 2000 Presidential Election to remember what happened in Florida, consider the motives and tactics in play, and think critically about how things resolved. From all accounts it is a fascinating take on recent political history - that is, if you can detach yourself from the subject matter enough to appreciate the story they are telling. Here's the trailer:
It premieres Sunday Night - I wish I had HBO... and a blanket to hide under.
Clinton's rationale
I spent a while last night crunching some numbers related to the Democratic primary campaign. I was curious to see where things stand, where things could go (mathematically) over the next few weeks, and why Clinton might be in the race.
My analysis shows Obama is presently leading Clinton by 154 pledged delegates (not including superdels). Now, over the next 11 days a series of events are going to happen that are going to spell the last official battlegrounds for the Clinton and Obama campaigns before the convention in Denver this August.
1) Saturday, May 31st: the DNC rules committee meets for the final time before the convention to decide what to do about the delegations from Michigan and Florida whose state parties broke the rules and held their contests early. If (and this is a big if) the rules committee decides to seat the entire delegation of each state as allocated by the rule-breaking elections that were held, Clinton stands to net 36 delegates from Florida and anywhere from 18 delegates up to 55 (*very* unlikely) from the Michigan contest, depending upon how the 'uncommitted' delegates are allocated (since Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan). Thus, the Clinton campaign could net anywhere from 56-91 delegates from this, best-case scenario for them.
2) Sunday, June 1st: Puerto Rico holds their nominating process with 55 pledged delegates at stake. Giving Clinton a 2-1 margin of victory, in line with her successes in WV/KY (i.e. being very generous to Clinton) she could pick up 17 delegates from this contest.
3) Tuesday, June 3rd: Montana and South Dakota hold their nominating elections, with a total of 31 delegates (16 from MT, 15 from SD) at stake. Assuming Clinton wins 2/3 of the vote in both of those contests (being very, very generous to Clinton on this point), she could net a max of about 11 delegates from these two states. Thus she has the potential to net 28 delegates over the last three remaining contests, maximum, and that's probably being very generous to her chances in Montana and South Dakota.
Let's assume that all three of these events play out in an absolute best-case-scenario for the Clinton camp: she nets 28 delegates from the remaining contests and picks up 91 delegates by the seating of the in-violation MI and FL delegations. That's a potential pick up of 119 pledged delegates to Clinton which is not enough to catch Obama's lead of 154 pledged delegates. So, what is her endgame.
Some have suggested that she might be trying to force the Obama campaign's hand on a VP offer:
This has potential, and Obama would have to consider it (perhaps begrudgingly).
HOWEVER, in my opinion the events of today have changed the landscape a bit. Today, in an interview with a SD newspaper editorial board, Clinton suggested that Democratic nomination contests have stretched into June before. She cited (as specific examples) the campaign of her husband in 1992 and the campaign of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Here's the clip:
Now, Clinton's remarks are probably an unfortunate campaign gaffe. Rather than stating that RFK's nomination fight extended into June, she brought up his assassination. This is unfortunate for Clinton because a) political assassination has become a touchy subject on the campaign trail this spring and b) Ted Kennedy has been in the news lately for his poor health and also his support of Obama's candidacy.
(here's the analysis of a couple of other blogs)
People have been (unfairly) reading into Clinton's statement that her rationale for staying in the race is that Obama could be assassinated. This is in line with her statements of "as far as I know" Obama is not a Muslim. In addition, when called to clarify/apologize for her statements, she apologized solely to the Kennedys without a mention of Obama. It seems like a gaffe - and probably is a gaffe - but for a political machine as shrewd as Clinton's, this kind of thing gets heavily scrutinized. (Apparently this isn't the first time she's made comments that recall Kennedy's assassination and linking it to the length of this nomination campaign - to me, this smacks of Mark Penn).
Ultimately I think this diminishes her leverage with the Obama campaign over the whole VP issue. However, it remains to be seen what the fallout from her statements today will be and how that will play upon the events of the next two weeks. I hope that through the rules committee meeting and other discussions between the campaigns in the near future a suitable resolution is achieved that allows:
My analysis shows Obama is presently leading Clinton by 154 pledged delegates (not including superdels). Now, over the next 11 days a series of events are going to happen that are going to spell the last official battlegrounds for the Clinton and Obama campaigns before the convention in Denver this August.
1) Saturday, May 31st: the DNC rules committee meets for the final time before the convention to decide what to do about the delegations from Michigan and Florida whose state parties broke the rules and held their contests early. If (and this is a big if) the rules committee decides to seat the entire delegation of each state as allocated by the rule-breaking elections that were held, Clinton stands to net 36 delegates from Florida and anywhere from 18 delegates up to 55 (*very* unlikely) from the Michigan contest, depending upon how the 'uncommitted' delegates are allocated (since Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan). Thus, the Clinton campaign could net anywhere from 56-91 delegates from this, best-case scenario for them.
2) Sunday, June 1st: Puerto Rico holds their nominating process with 55 pledged delegates at stake. Giving Clinton a 2-1 margin of victory, in line with her successes in WV/KY (i.e. being very generous to Clinton) she could pick up 17 delegates from this contest.
3) Tuesday, June 3rd: Montana and South Dakota hold their nominating elections, with a total of 31 delegates (16 from MT, 15 from SD) at stake. Assuming Clinton wins 2/3 of the vote in both of those contests (being very, very generous to Clinton on this point), she could net a max of about 11 delegates from these two states. Thus she has the potential to net 28 delegates over the last three remaining contests, maximum, and that's probably being very generous to her chances in Montana and South Dakota.
Let's assume that all three of these events play out in an absolute best-case-scenario for the Clinton camp: she nets 28 delegates from the remaining contests and picks up 91 delegates by the seating of the in-violation MI and FL delegations. That's a potential pick up of 119 pledged delegates to Clinton which is not enough to catch Obama's lead of 154 pledged delegates. So, what is her endgame.
Some have suggested that she might be trying to force the Obama campaign's hand on a VP offer:
This has potential, and Obama would have to consider it (perhaps begrudgingly).
HOWEVER, in my opinion the events of today have changed the landscape a bit. Today, in an interview with a SD newspaper editorial board, Clinton suggested that Democratic nomination contests have stretched into June before. She cited (as specific examples) the campaign of her husband in 1992 and the campaign of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Here's the clip:
Now, Clinton's remarks are probably an unfortunate campaign gaffe. Rather than stating that RFK's nomination fight extended into June, she brought up his assassination. This is unfortunate for Clinton because a) political assassination has become a touchy subject on the campaign trail this spring and b) Ted Kennedy has been in the news lately for his poor health and also his support of Obama's candidacy.
(here's the analysis of a couple of other blogs)
People have been (unfairly) reading into Clinton's statement that her rationale for staying in the race is that Obama could be assassinated. This is in line with her statements of "as far as I know" Obama is not a Muslim. In addition, when called to clarify/apologize for her statements, she apologized solely to the Kennedys without a mention of Obama. It seems like a gaffe - and probably is a gaffe - but for a political machine as shrewd as Clinton's, this kind of thing gets heavily scrutinized. (Apparently this isn't the first time she's made comments that recall Kennedy's assassination and linking it to the length of this nomination campaign - to me, this smacks of Mark Penn).
Ultimately I think this diminishes her leverage with the Obama campaign over the whole VP issue. However, it remains to be seen what the fallout from her statements today will be and how that will play upon the events of the next two weeks. I hope that through the rules committee meeting and other discussions between the campaigns in the near future a suitable resolution is achieved that allows:
- The contested MI & FL delegations to be (at least) partially seated so that 'disenfranchisement' doesn't become synonymous with the Obama campaign
- Clinton to gracefully exit the race
- Obama to be seen as the candidate unifying the party, healing wounds, and choosing an appropriate VP candidate (and not having one foisted upon him)
time waster for nerds
so if you're a nerd (like me) this website could wind up being a sinkhole for your time - fair warning.
It's called swivel.com and it's a forum to which people can upload, analyze, and discuss data. ALL KINDS of data - sociological, political, scientific, sports-related, etc.
I can see myself spending a lot of time thinking about random bits of data related to subjects I had not even considered before... this could be dangerous(ly fun).
It's called swivel.com and it's a forum to which people can upload, analyze, and discuss data. ALL KINDS of data - sociological, political, scientific, sports-related, etc.
I can see myself spending a lot of time thinking about random bits of data related to subjects I had not even considered before... this could be dangerous(ly fun).
I want to see:
Righteous Kill, the new Deniro/Pacino movie that's coming out this year. It looks AWESOME!
Here's the trailer:
Here's the trailer:
Thursday
Senator Jim Webb (D-Va) on Letterman
Seeing Webb on Letterman gets me thinking about a possible Obama/Webb '08:
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Wednesday
making computers 'smarter'
I came across a site on the internet the other day that has an interesting premise - you play the games on the website to help computers get "smarter".
It's called gwap.com and I'm curious about the CS behind it for all my CS-type friends. Anyone?
It's called gwap.com and I'm curious about the CS behind it for all my CS-type friends. Anyone?
Tuesday
Kennedy has brain tumor
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Ma) was rushed to Massachusettes General Hospital over the weekend after what were reported to be seizures and stroke-like symptoms. All seemed well at the time as he was apparently recovering in the hospital and well enough to carry on conversations with family, Barack Obama, etc. Now comes news (via the AP) that the senator has been diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. This is terrible news because the prognosis is generally not good - 1 to 5 years. It remains to be seen how aggressive Kennedy's cancer is, but sad news indeed.
Kennedy has been a senator for 46 years (since 1962 - the year before his brother was assassinated) and is presently holds the second-longest tenure of any current sitting U.S. Senator. He has been called a lion of the senate, a senior statesman who has striven to work in a bipartisan way to achieve many liberal goals including health care and the minimum wage.
Kennedy has been a senator for 46 years (since 1962 - the year before his brother was assassinated) and is presently holds the second-longest tenure of any current sitting U.S. Senator. He has been called a lion of the senate, a senior statesman who has striven to work in a bipartisan way to achieve many liberal goals including health care and the minimum wage.
why did no one tell me
That Death Cab for Cutie's new CD (Narrow Stairs) is out?!?
It was released on the 9th and I've seen/heard nothing about it! KEXP? Music blogs? Russ? Beth? Claire? maybe it's because I've been sick.
Anyway, I've heard the iTunes snippets and they sound good, but I'm gonna try to find full songs somewhere on the internets until I can go find the CD for my own self.
It was released on the 9th and I've seen/heard nothing about it! KEXP? Music blogs? Russ? Beth? Claire? maybe it's because I've been sick.
Anyway, I've heard the iTunes snippets and they sound good, but I'm gonna try to find full songs somewhere on the internets until I can go find the CD for my own self.
Wednesday
in other words, a typical Friday night
The Lede blog (NYT) has an interesting piece up about a modern courtship ritual called "numbering", i.e.:
chasing cars containing young girls and trying to give the girls their phone numbers via Bluetooth, or by holding written phone numbers up to their car windows.Apparently, though technically harassment, this illegal activity is popular with Saudi Arabian boys.
“I’d say that maybe 3 out of 10 nights of numbering,we have some success,” Fahad explained.“You mean that 3 out of 10 nights you get a girl to talk to you?” I asked.
“No, no,” Fahad laughed. “Maybe 3 out of 10 nights we get one phone number. Getting a girl to actually talk to you on the phone is much rarer. But it happens, so we’re always hoping.”
Been there, man. Seriously, this is a rough life, suppressing natural urges to this extent. In addition the actual description of it sounds quite dangerous, not to mention misogynistic:
I looked around. We were surrounded by several other cars, all containing young men and all trying to get the attention of the figures in the GMC, while simultaneously trying to edge each other off the road at high speed.
“Isn’t this getting a bit dangerous?” I asked.
“Yeah,” said Fahad. “Sometimes the girls get really scared, there are so many cars chasing them. Sometimes they’re in their car, crying and screaming for us to go away. It’s fun to make girls angry.”
neuroscience vs. religion
very interesting NYT article about the coming (present?) conflict between religion and the revolutions in neuroscience and genetics that are currently underway.
Tuesday
Monday
Sunday
Friday
Geuss the genome!
I just ran across this website where they've initiated a competition (of sorts). The basic premise is that you reconstruct a person's identity based on genomic information provided by the site - this is a real person whose genome these people have sequenced. The contestant's goal: figure out as much information about the person as possible (ancestry, medical conditions, what have you) and the person who comes the closest (subjectively, based on the judges), wins!
What do they win, you ask? Well they win their own genome! Yes, you best describe this woman based on the information they provide (pretty much a guessing game) and they'll sequence your genome - PRETTY SWEET!
What do they win, you ask? Well they win their own genome! Yes, you best describe this woman based on the information they provide (pretty much a guessing game) and they'll sequence your genome - PRETTY SWEET!
Thursday
brilliant!
clearly an ad for some sort of energy drink... but, I say to thee dear advertiser creators, bravo!
Wednesday
The (new) numbers
The NYT Caucus Blog has an updated tally of where the Democratic nomination race stands. Per their calculations:
Popular vote (including Florida & Michigan totals, bunk or not):
Obama needs to acquire 178 delegates to clinch it and Clinton needs 339. In other words, Obama has 91.2% of the delegates needed to become the party's nominee while Clinton has 83.3%. In the six contests that remain there are 217 pledged delegates at stake and there are still approximately 223 superdelegates who have not yet made their preference known.
This thing is (as everyone else besides Hillary Clinton has surmised) all but over. What remains now is to end it with grace, dignity and unity in the party and move on to putting together a unified message on why Obama is the better candidate for America and why John McCain shouldn't be the 44th President of the U.S.
(oh, and figure out a way to dull the evident smear campaigns that are gearing up anti-Obama - unpatriotic, Wright, etc.)
Popular vote (including Florida & Michigan totals, bunk or not):
Barack Obama: 17.1 Million
Hillary Clinton: 16.7 Million
Total Delegates (pledged + super; total needed = 2,025):
Barack Obama: 1,847
Hillary Clinton: 1,686
Hillary Clinton: 16.7 Million
Total Delegates (pledged + super; total needed = 2,025):
Barack Obama: 1,847
Hillary Clinton: 1,686
Obama needs to acquire 178 delegates to clinch it and Clinton needs 339. In other words, Obama has 91.2% of the delegates needed to become the party's nominee while Clinton has 83.3%. In the six contests that remain there are 217 pledged delegates at stake and there are still approximately 223 superdelegates who have not yet made their preference known.
This thing is (as everyone else besides Hillary Clinton has surmised) all but over. What remains now is to end it with grace, dignity and unity in the party and move on to putting together a unified message on why Obama is the better candidate for America and why John McCain shouldn't be the 44th President of the U.S.
(oh, and figure out a way to dull the evident smear campaigns that are gearing up anti-Obama - unpatriotic, Wright, etc.)
Tuesday
another reason why Obama's my candidate:
“Where’s my beer?” [Obama] asked, loud enough for the reporters to hear.
What’s your pleasure, Mr. Candidate? He eyed an array of mighty fine micro brews on tap, from the loverly amber Maharaja IPA to the “naturally cloudy” Blanche Bruxelles. He zeroed in on the mass market.
“PBR [Pabst Blue Ribbon, for the unitiated],” he said.
The man recognizes a winner when he sees one... it is an award-winning beer, by the way. (NBD)
Arrested Development
I've been going back in time lately and re-discovering the grooves of Arrested Development, exhibit A:
Frank Miller, you visionary...
Frank Miller (of 300 and Sin City fame) has a new movie coming out sometime soon... and, you guessed it, it's based on a comic book.
It's called THE SPIRIT and it stars Gabriel Macht as a film noir-ish cop/superhero who 'mysteriously' comes back from death to watch over his city and protect it from the likes of villains - none other than Samuel L. Jackson, thank you very much - and a who's who of leading ladies - including Scarlett Johansson and Eva Mendes. The trailer has definitely whetted my whistle.
It's called THE SPIRIT and it stars Gabriel Macht as a film noir-ish cop/superhero who 'mysteriously' comes back from death to watch over his city and protect it from the likes of villains - none other than Samuel L. Jackson, thank you very much - and a who's who of leading ladies - including Scarlett Johansson and Eva Mendes. The trailer has definitely whetted my whistle.
Friday
Exactly.
Bill Moyers breaks down the Wright media debacle of the past month plus and gets it - in my opinion - exactly correct.
Note particularly the double standards that the media, and many others in their tread, are employing:
I've been fascinated by the way everyone and their cousin condemns Reverand Wright's words and ideas, but everyone tacitly accepts the bigotry and hatred contained within Hagee and Robertson's words.
Note particularly the double standards that the media, and many others in their tread, are employing:
I've been fascinated by the way everyone and their cousin condemns Reverand Wright's words and ideas, but everyone tacitly accepts the bigotry and hatred contained within Hagee and Robertson's words.
Thursday
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)