OPINION 7A THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5. 2008 》 GUEST COLUMN Torture, foreign policy separate Clinton, Obama Kansas joins 21 other states in having its Democratic presidential primary today. Many voters know about Barack Obama's rare charisma, and they rightly consider it when determining their decision. Indeed, Obama's oratorical gifts allow him to frame progressive issues in a way that is more palatable to Americans who would otherwise not accept his left-leaning agenda. Obama offers policies every bit as substantive as Hillary Clinton's, and he is better suited to improve America's standing in the world. Obama and Clinton offer very similar domestic agendas, but Obama's foreign policy ideas convince me to caucus for him. The 2002 Iraq War resolution is history, but Clinton's tortured explanations are instructive of her foreign policy judgment. In the last debate, she claimed she voted to authorize using force to give Bush leverage to get the inspectors into Iraq. She emphatically claimed that it was not a vote to go to war. This echoes Kerry's rather uncompelling argument in 2004. Clinton's vote against the Levin amendment, which would have required Bush to return to Congress for a second authorization to actually invade Iraq, belies her claim. Clinton abandoned her responsiblity as a senator to check Bush's rush to war, and her subsequent attempts to cover it up undermine my confidence in both her honesty and judgment. Obama opposed the war from the start, in the heat of a campaign and at a time when more than 60 percent of the country supported the war. Clinton called Obama naive for pledging to meet with enemy regimes, but she's the shallow one for assuming that engagement necessarily means harmful concessions. Obama steadfastly and categorically rejects torture and includes his opposition to it in his stump speech. The most important policy difference is their stances on torture. Although Clinton has opposed the Bush administration's tactics (not exactly a hard call to make), the New York Daily News wrote, "Sen. Hillary Clinton (D.N.Y.) said she supports legalizing the torture of a captured terror suspect who knows about 'an imminent threat to millions of Americans' — making an exception to her opposition to torture and marking a key difference from her possible rival for the White House, Sen. John McCain (R-Aritz)." There are major problems with this position, and they disqualify her as a candidate. She concedes that torture can be an effective interrogation technique, undermining one of the most potent arguments against the practice. Tortured suspects do not give accurate information, rendering the stakes of the interrogation irrelevant. Torture erodes the basic empathy that underpins ethics. Clinton runs to the right of McCain on this issue, and Democrats should not concede important ground to the GOP this fall. Hillary Clinton certainly possesses diligence and intelligence, but Obama has demonstrated those qualities and more. For this Democratic caucus goer, the choice is clear. He matches stirring rhetoric with sound policy, a combination that promises to push America in a new and positive direction, especially in foreign policy. Andrew MacDonald is senior in history and political science. Selling out to Guitar Hero COMMENTARY Todav's 'rock stars' have become little more than corporate prostitutes If you've ever spent a lazy weekend in Lawrence, it's likely you've heard the unmistakable tapping that will forever be coupled with the game Guitar Hero. It's more than likely that you've strapped on the plastic axe and clicked along to a couple of tunes yourself. I'm not alone when I say that there's something extremely off about seeing a rock icon who once stood as a symbol of rebellion for millions on stage next to a sweater-clad Bill Gates. Nonetheless, Bill and the gang recently unveiled the next chapter in musical fakery, Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock. Gates ushered in the occasion by parading guitar legend slash from Guns and Roses, on out stage. Slash appears in the video game in all of his high-resolution, long-haired glory, but when he emerged from the smoke in front of a 10-yard-wide Microsoft logo there was a noticeable absence of mystique. I love classic rock as much as the next guy, and I know that the world doesn't even turn unless you feed it a buck, but I can't stand to see the men who once appeared so godly on stage pushing products that represent the very establishments they fought against in their music. The hypocrisy is just too great to bear. Honestly, what have we come to when Bobby Dylan is making cameos in Cadillac commercials? When stars prostitute their image to the highest bidder, they are robbing the very image they are trying to sell of its integrity. Rock star rebellion and corporate slogans don't go hand in hand. But the commercialization doesn't stop there. Anyone with an eye on the music world for the past few years is well aware of the resurgence of classic rock. Bands such as The Who, Cream, The Police and the original paragons of rock, Led Zeppelin, have all decided to reunite and have another go. But seeing all of these big names lit up on a marquee begs a simple question: Why are these bands going back on tour? Pardon the idealistic binge, but could they be reassembling to rescue music from the rut of repetitious pop dribble that's currently swarming the radio? noble cause, the reality is that marketers finally realized that when the members of young rebel generation grew up, their pockets may have grown with them. Or could it be that they simply need another suck off the cash cow that is rock 'n' roll nostalgia? As much as I'd like to believe it a Some of them are willing to pay a high price to revisit the soundtrack of their youth. That's not to mention the hoards of new listeners that have been cultivated since the bands originally split up. To get true perspective on the issue, consider who we think of when we reflect on the great names of Rock n' Roll Past. Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, Jerry Garcia and John Lennon seem to all ring a bell. The alliterated greats of the era were all burnt into our memories, not by big name reunion tours but because the music they made was honest, and it was good. It was motivated by a desire to play and to play well. Money mattered, but that wasn't what they were playing for. Maybe it was seeing John Paul Jones with a buzz cut, or maybe it was a gray-topped Jimmy Page who enlightened me to the artificial nature of resurrected music. Either way, despite the fact that the new wave of reunion shows may lack the spirit of the originals, when I put my headphones on, Plant can still wall, and the songs are as great as ever. For that reason, I know that the day Zep decides to tour the States, I'll be in line for a ticket. Lerman is a Highland Park, Ill., sophomore in journalism. COMMENTARY Consider cost of living in a box on or off campus As a creative writing major, I already know I'm going to end up living in a box. But until then, housing is important. places (well, I did hate McCollum at first, but mostly because of living on the eighth floor and having all the fifth floor people hog the elevators). All three of them had their pros and cons. Many of the hottest properties in Lawrence are available to rent in August, and student-housing contracts are due soon. I've moved every year I've been in college. I started in McCollum, moved to a scholarship hall (holla to all the lovely ladies of Sellards), and have survived a semester off campus. To live on campus or to live off campus? That is the question. I don't regret living in those Student housing is not necessarily cheaper than off campus housing. What I used to pay to live in Sellards for nine months lasts me for 12 months off campus, and that includes rent, utilities and Internet (although it's much better to be a victim of ResNet than Sunflower Broadband. Mott: Customer satisfaction NOT included). Also, buying your own groceries is cheaper than a meal plan. Cost is up to you. You can live in places cheaper than the dorms (Meadowbrook Apartments) or places more expensive (the Trump Tower). Besides price, you need to decide what you want most. On campus, you are much closer to campus resources like the libraries, the Rec center and the student Plus, you know where your food comes from (probably China). unions. In addition, you can walk to class. There's no long commute or dealing with the Parking Department (which, if you've read my past articles, you know I have about as much respect for them as I do the devil, only I'm probably more likely to sell my soul to the devil because he can personally guarantee me a parking spot...in hell). However, some apartments are close enough to walk to campus or are on the bus route. Another positive feature of student housing is most of the maintenance and cleaning is done for you and in a timely manner. Depending on the management, getting anything fixed can take as long as it takes to graduate. If you get a newer place, maintenance is usually not a problem. I personally prefer off campus housing. Minus the commute and competitive parking, I enjoy going to a place every night that's not on campus. It's nice to take a break from the academic world. I have my own room, and it is much quieter and less distracting. I don't feel like I'm at a long summer camp. I have a home to go to and call mine. I like having more space and having the freedom to do what I want with it. If I'm up late in my room, I don't wake up anybody but myself and the voices in my head. I can also clean whenever I want. In the scholarship halls, it was stressful cleaning up after 50 people and trying to fit my shifts around work and classes. Having to share my bathroom with one person is better than 20. And there's always hot water. Regardless of where you live, you have plenty of options. Keep looking until you find what you want. Excuse me. I've got to claim the empty refrigerator box that music major is eyeing. Hartz is a Stilwell junior in creative writing. Visit Kansan.com and add the Facebook application, "University Daily Kansan," to start contributing. Last night I traded Ron Paul some quick sex in a bathroom vehicle for a sawbuck. 》 FREE FOR ALL ubicle for a sawbuc --to pay taxes? Please tell me I'm not the only person that saw a guy rollerblading in front of Nun- --to pay taxes? Kudos to ESPN for not folding to the pressure to be politically correct. It's the Border WAR, not the Border Showdown. Showdown. --already paid. How come Republicans are the first to ante up and spend the money (cough cough, the war, cough cough) but the last to pay taxes? My parents don't do shit for me. I've worked my ass off for everything I've ever had. I can be a damn Democrat if I want. --already paid. --already paid. Yeah, suck it. I may not know everything about politics, but I know what I believe. And I know who I want to bone. PS. Quite a bit is how much I'm paying. Zero is how many exemptions I'm claiming. To the Republicans: Quite a bit being as I'm 24 and have a real job and my taxes are already paid. --- --- I think Lou's finally in love. What college-aged person actually has to pay taxes? How many exemptions are you claiming? --- To the pissy Democrat: You sound pretty irritable around tax time. Lew Perkins was at the Super Bowl because he's hoping to hold the Border Showdown in Arizona. --- I thought the funniest commercial was the baby talking about stocks with the "creepy" clown in the background. Lew was there, and I thought for sure he was the ugliest person at the game until I saw the owner of the Giants. --- To the whiny Republican: I'm a Democrat, and I paid my own taxes. Kiss my ass. TALK TO US Darla Slipke, editor 864-4810 or slipke@kansan.com Want more? Check out Free For All online. @KANSAN.COM Matt Erickson, managing editor 864-4810 or merickson@kansan.com Lauren Keith, associate opinion editor 864-4924 or lkeith@kansan.com CONTACT US Toni Bergquist, business manager 864-4358 or tbergquist@kansan.com Dianne Smith management editor 846-410-30 or drintshakman.com Bryan Dykman opinion editor 846-429-20 or drintshakman.com Katy Pitt, sales manager 864-4477 or kpitt@kansan.com Malcolm Gibson, general manager and news officer 864-765-302 or malcolmgibsonkann.com Jon Schlittt, sales and marketing adviser 864-7666 or jschlittt@kansan.com SUBMISSIONS SUBMISSIONS The Kansas welcomes letters to the editors and guest columns submitted by students, faculty and alumni. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length, or reject all submissions. For questions about submissions, call Bryan Dykman or Lauren Keith at 864-4810 or e-mail dykmankansan.com. General questions should be directed to the editor at editorjkansan.com. LETTER GUIDELINES Maximum Length: 200 words The submission must include: Author's name and telephone number; class, home town (student); position (faculty member/staff) phone number (will not be published) Maximum Length: 500 words GUEST COLUMN GUIDELINES The submission must include: Author's name and telephone number; class, hometown (student); position (faculty member/staff); phone number (will not be published) The Kansan will not print guest columns or letters that attack a reporter or another columnist. THE EDITORIAL BOARD Members of the Kansan Editorial Board are Darla Slipke, Matt Erickson, Dianne Smith, Bryan Dykman, Lauren Keith and Zach White.