Wonk Wonk

And Also: There seems to be an annoying meme, mentioned by Sen. Durbin yesterday too, that those darn Iraqis should get off their asses and do things on their own. Look at all we did for you! Yeah, it's their fault. OTOH, as a caller noted on Air America, maybe we can just say we won. Saddam is gone. No WMDs. They have a Constitution. So, let's leave. Reality aside, saying how we lost and all just drives the President on, since those sorts don't want to admit defeat. Now, this might backfire. It might encourage other stupidity. No easy solutions though.

I am not really a wonk sort of guy -- I have read some wonky stuff now and again, but public policy details are not really my forte. For instance, energy policy -- any number of nuances there. I try to know a bit about the issues at hand and do think I have the ability to make a fair judgment of reasoning processes of those who make various arguments. But, the matter does not really interest me too much, and I respect my limitations. All the same, I have general tendencies, which are determined by rough judgments based on my readings and basic understandings that grow out of them.

Thus, for instance, a rise in the minimum wage makes sense to me, I concur in attacks of the lamer criticisms (and over the top denunciations), but sure, when certain blogs start to toss out charts and so forth, my eyes glaze over. This is because I have read some stuff on the topic, including both sides basic takes though admittedly more on the pro side, and have spent about twenty years analyzing public policy material to such a degree that I trust my basic judgments on such issues. Honestly, economic issues are not my primary concern (you know, except when I'm paying the bills), though I know that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" involves economics too. Leave out "property" if you like, it's still there. Still, I think benefits (think of the non-payroll perks of federal judges) might be more important in some ways. Health and day care costs money too.

And, my general sentiment, one that is sometimes clouded by annoyances at other things (civil liberties, the war, etc.), is that it would be glorious if we can have a more progressive government in place, one that might be wrong or incomplete in some ways, but basically go in the right direction. Universal health care. True concern for unions and workers. Truly recognizing the potential of national communication regulation, you know, in a positive way. Heck, even a firmer acceptance that basically religious matters, or if you like, matters of conscience, should be left to private choice. (The recently referenced debate included a citation of this interesting article on the evangelistic atheist.)

I might add that this is one reason so many like Sen. Obama -- he has a slew of progressive ideas, promoting a vision that shows potential, if also having some troubling "be safe" tendencies. Equal time merits noting that John Edwards also has some ideas in that department though seems a bit less wonky, more of an overall image and progressive spirit sort of guy. Anyway, the focus -- shades of Edwards -- should be elsewhere. The new Congress. State legislatures and some gubernatorial pick-ups (e.g., NY and MA). And, people like you. PBS has another "please give us money" drive going on -- replayed the first segment of the Civil War series.

I sorta thought it was a good thing that we had something of a "do nothing" Republican Congress, since we really did not want them to do much. It is not like we really would like the activist path they could have taken. Also, less government is basically their m.o., right? So, it seemed a bit off to complain too much about that. Progressive legislators are different. They can offer us something productively. The audacity of hope?

BTW, "wonk wonk" sorta sounds like those noises the adults make in those Peanuts cartoons.