Matthew Comments

I once worked at a public university that had a huge 'deferred maintenance' problem. Their major equipment was often 35 years old with an expected lifetime of 30 years. As a result, they were constantly doing repairs and paying overtime, but had little time to do preventive maintenance and little money to make pro-active investments in new equipment. In one dorm, water from bad showers on the upper floors started leaking into the main lobby, and the 'fix' was to drag out garbage cans to catch the water. I was told that repairing the plumbing itself was expensive so it was being figured into the "five-year budget plan." The garbage can fix went on for at least a year. A two-page spread in The Atlantic Monthly (March 2008, p 38-39) calls out our nation's growing infrastructure problem. This is a real 'tragedy of the commons' situation: individuals are not willing to give up more tax money if they don't see a real-time, personal benefit. At the sa...

John Torinus is a local Milwaukee CEO who writes pro-business articles in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. I tend to appreciate them, and he's pretty reasonable. His latest article "Obama speech was full of anti-business rhetoric," intersects with my recent thoughts: will the Democratic nominee be reasonably pro-middle class, or wildly anti-business? Here's the editorial: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=730879 And here's my breakdown of Torinus, right and wrong: Torinus is right that Obama's rhetoric lacks pragmatism on economic issues. He should learn from Hillary, who learned from Bill's partnership with business. Obama is busy riding his populist wave, but will find it difficult to govern effectively if he alienates the business community. Plus, there's reality: we can't run from free trade now, and our economy is largely based on "nothing more than a profit." Torinus is wrong to imply that political and religious leaders ar...

Putting aside feelings about how we got to this point, I don't believe that quick withdrawals from Iraq, or promises of quick withdrawals from Iraq, are pragmatic or strategically wise. Senator Obama is the lone candidate who is solidly pro-withdrawal. It makes him politically exciting, but could become an albatross in a long campaign for the Presidency or in his administration if he wins. Here is a link to a counterinsurgency expert who talks about this issue. He sidesteps a question that asked him to judge current candidates, which I think adds to his credibility. (NPR.org, Nagl: Beating Insurgents Takes Unconventional War) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18921312

Robert Reich, former Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton and former Chairman of Goldman-Sachs, has put a nice editorial in the NY Times. I hope this means he is eager to serve in a new administration, at least as an advisor. ( NY Times, Totally Spent , 2/13/08). Find it at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/opinion/13reich.html?em&ex=1203138000&en=28af38a856305f61&ei=5087%0A

In a letter to the editor of the Atlantic Monthly, William Bendix comments: "Probably the best explanation for the growing divide in American politics comes from Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal, who argue that growing economic disparities and rising immigration rates are strongly correlated with political polarization. In their book, Polarized America (2006), they show that ideological divisions decreased between 1913 and 1957, when income disparities and immigration rates fell, and that the divisions have increased sharply since the 1970s, as income disparities and immigration rates suddenly grew. Interesting and well put. I'd be interested to see the more specific influences of income disparities and immigration rates independent of each other, and how the authors factor in the influence of social/religious issues such as abortion and gay marraige.

I support Hillary over Obama. Why? Both have a level of idealism, but Clinton mixes in a healthy dose of pragmatism. I watched Obama speak a couple times and was inspired. I saw him speak a couple more times and thought "enough with the pretty-talk." Although he follows Frank Luntz' rules of communication really well, the debates expose Hillary's dominance when it comes down to brass tacks in policy. I am longing for a president that educates the American people on the complexity of issues, rather than sticking to simplistic populist themes. Hillary proved, in Congress, that she could reach across party lines and work professionally even with people who had worked to demonize her. That's really what we're looking for. Obama is not the first campaigner to say "I'm a uniter, not a divider." It's easy to say, but very hard to do. Obama is putting himself farther to the left on Iraq than reality will allow if he becomes president. He's doing ...

Most simply, it's a statement about values and war, summed up with "Whose deaths matter and whose do not?" It points out our natural bias to value only those lives most connected to us, and implies that our (American) effectiveness at warfare may be exacerbating that bias. I agree with her that the civilian casualty issue is under-appreciated. Both the cost of war and the use of torture by American agents receive more domestic attention and debate than foreign civilian casualties caused by US actions. That moral calculus is worth some reflection. Each nation (or ethnic group, religious group, etc) mourns its own dead with special significance. That is natural. Perhaps a nation that wants to be a positive force in this world (and often purports to be doing other nations a favor by using military force) should consider the perspective of citizens of those nations. Pragmatism often must take trump in foreign affairs, but I want to work for moral sophistication, not only stra...