McCain’s “Knowledge Gap”

Indeed, there are plenty of sharp policy wonks on the wrong side of any issue. The President doesn’t have to be a master of detail. He has advisors. But he has to at least learn enough from his advisors to be able to make an informed decision. McCain doesn’t seem to be able to do this, and his mistakes seem to be more about ideological blindness and political deception than a lack of education.

McCain’s nonsense about Al-Qaeda is remarkably similar to one of the major deceptions that got us into Iraq in the first place, when the Bush administration managed to convince the majority of Americans that Saddam Hussein was tied to Al-Qaeda and even to the September 11 terrorist attacks. The gaffe about Social Security is in line with standard right-wing fairy tales about Social Security being some big Ponzi scheme about to go bust. And the off-shore drilling proposal looks like an effort to make it look like some very small efforts to preserve the environment – rather than the long-term failure of U.S. energy policy – are responsible for soaring gasoline prices.

But regardless of motivation, McCain’s “knowledge gap” should raise some doubts about whether he is qualified to be President.

CEPR – McCain’s “Knowledge Gap”: It’s An Issue . By Mark Weisbrot June 11, 2008, AlterNet

I have this feeling that this issue is going to be murkier than it should be, simply because no one wants to be accused of ageism. I think, too, that there is a legitimate generational issue, given the rapid pace of change. McCain, for example, doesn’t use a personal computer.

What’s worse, to me, is that we keep promoting candidates who are almost willfully ignorant. It’s our anti-intellectualism raising it’s ugly head again. Too often these lapses seem calculated, as Weisbrot says. And too often they seem part of a sort of macho, “know-nothing” swagger.

Think Again RPCVs: Robert L. Strauss Revisited

Most Peace Corps volunteer placements will be in soft positions where big steps towards progress are not feasible. I have sent some students into Peace Corps. One gave up after 6 months. The other stayed an extra year and when her project failed because of local government interference it broke her heart.

The idea of bringing high school students to rural Haiti is ridiculous. I have been with undergraduate and graduate students. They have to be mature enough to deal with what they have to live in. College grads are just barely mature enough to be away from home in a strange country.

Not to sound like I am a Pollyanna for the Corps, but I do think that Volunteers have a big impact. Maybe not all of us, but enough come back and teach, enter public service, run for office, conduct research. The rest of us understand foreign events better than the average citizen, who I might add could use a better international education here. I served with some of the best of the best. I wasn’t one of them, but I tried. I could enter a short list here, but I don’t want to embarrass anybody.

Avram Primack, in a comment on Think Again RPCVs: Robert L. Strauss, May 20, 2008

My hurt little ego aside, I think Mr. Primack is simply wrong; to me, his post represents a lack of imagination that seems particularly upsetting given that in less than five months we may have the first African American president of the United States.

There’s no guarantee that Obama will succeed, but this seems like a good time to dream big. I can’t set out a detailed proposal, given space limitations, but I can sketch out how a program such as the one I suggested might work, starting with the 9th grade.

Continue Reading →

Parity for Mass Transit

The buzz on gas prices has people rethinking the way they travel. USA Today recently reported record breaking public transit ridership based on a study by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). For the months of January through March 2008 ridership increased 10% when compared to the same months in 2007. And while many riders are making the switch due to rising fuel prices, many of them stick to public transit for its “service and convenience,” according to Linda Robson of Seattle’s Sound Transit. For riders fortunate enough to live and work near major bus and rail lines, the shift makes a lot of sense.

But how many people really have this good fortune? According to the 2006 US census, only about 1 in 5 households. The logical solution: Make bus and rail lines more extensive. The bleak reality: No one wants to pay for it.

Enviroblog, “Public funds for public transport,” Jorg Etilico, July 3, 2008

Here’s a remarkable fact, from the The Northeast-Midwest Institute: “Highways get approximately $30 billion from the federal government in the Highway Trust Fund alone, while railway funding at best is $1 billion from all sources, for all purposes.”

Now try to image if we could insist on parity– if we spend $30 billion on highways and bridges, then we must also spend $30 billion on mass transit, including Amtrak. We need the jobs, we need the bridges fixed, and we need to change how we use energy. It seems like a no-brainer.

Actually, more personally, I am sick of dealing with airports whenever I want to travel to Louisiana and Texas to see my family. I would be happy to spend a day and a half on a train each way, twice a year, especially if there was a sleeper car and wireless access.

[This note comes from Amanda, at Enviroblog: “One thing — the post’s photo was by Jorg Elitico. The post itself was by our intern Sameem. Sorry for the confusion!”

Thanks! — Ray]

HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

“It would be difficult to identify a President who, facing major international and domestic crises, has failed in both as clearly as President Bush,” concluded one respondent. “His domestic policies,” another noted, “have had the cumulative effect of shoring up a semi-permanent aristocracy of capital that dwarfs the aristocracy of land against which the founding fathers rebelled; of encouraging a mindless retreat from science and rationalism; and of crippling the nation’s economic base.”

HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst, Robert S. McElvaine, April 1, 2008

This is old news by internet standards, but I am fascinated as much by the argument– which is specific and detailed and, finally, persuasive– as by the comments. The article is worth reading because it suggests the outlines of how reason might be returned to the public debate over politics.

I included the above comment from one of the surveyed historians because it neatly summarizes the criteria that underlies the assessment. An effective president should mute if not nullify capital, encourage rationality and scientific inquiry, and build the economic base.

I did not check all of the comments, but I doubt there is anyone willing to argue that the Bush administration fought for labor, nurtured the growth of knowledge, and created a thriving economy. At best, the argument is that he “did what he had to do” to fight terrorism.

The comments are interesting because the arguments against the survey’s conclusions reflect exactly the distorted political culture cultivated by the Bush administration. The goal of the anti-survey comments, in other words, is to shift the argument away from the criteria and towards the historians.

Ironically, these arguments reflect exactly the worst sort of bad-faith partisan arguments that the right wing so often attributes to academia. I think this “duck the issue” rhetoric is the best indication that the historians are on the right track. I doubt Bush will look any better in 50 years.