Friday’s Irish Times’s article on Irish bloggers (which inexplicably failed to namecheck yours truly) took the community to task for focusing on international matters–frequently US foreign policy–at the expense of native issues. (See Gavin’s Blog for extensive extracts from the piece).I sometimes do feel a tad guilty for failing to address the burning issues at home, but when my fingers hover over the keyboard to churn out some metacommentary on, say, Kevin “Bastard” Myers, my will to live starts to drain away.The failure of Irish bloggers to address one of the main turbines of news–politics–might be because if you’re not part of one of the dynasties that populate the D�il, the Irish parliamentary system often seems little more than a glorified county council. Thanks to the clientist system fostered by the high ratio of representatives to the electorate and multiseat constituencies, the average TD is more concerned about getting, say, a new road into (or keeping an incineration plant out of) her or his constituency than implementing any particular ideological principle. Of course, all politics is local, but to chronicle all the strings pulled by our politicians and public figures (check out this sweet deal, for example) could require a pettiness equal to the puppeteers’.In contrast, the reasons for the interest in the actions of US politicians is obvious. Their decisions have global ramifications. To illustrate the gulf between the two political arenas, let’s briefly remind ourselves of why two politicians, one American, the other Irish, should have resigned on at least two occasions. Donald Rumsfeld should have gone when it became clear that, despite warnings from the military, he had not allocated enough troops to control post-Saddam Iraq. And following the revelations of torture in Iraq, Rumsfeld’s departure would have signalled that the Bush Administration acknowledged the seriousness of what had happened. (Rumsfeld claimed that he offered to resign twice–but this candour should be taken with a pinch of salt.) Now we have our own answer to Rummy–the whey-faced Martin Cullen*. Anyone with a sense of shame would have walked after blowing over �50 million on a cockeyed electronic voting system. (It was particularly galling to hear Cullen label those who questioned the system’s security as troublemakers). But not only did Cullen stay, but Taoiseach Bertie** actually promoted him for his incompetence. Now Cullen is facing a raft of investigations after he appointed a campaign worker, Monica Leech (with whom he also went to a Malaysian resort at taxpayers’ expense), as a PR consultant. She was also far less experienced and more expensive than other bidders for the contract. After one report cleared Cullen, his leader stated that his minister had done nothing wrong and then went on to say that he would ensure that no minister could do anything like it again. An ambivalent signal to say the least. Yet Cullen still fails to do the honourable thing.Rumsfeld and Cullen. The difference between the effects of their mistakes is the difference between tragedy and farce. Which case would you bother to write about? And which would merely make you raise your eyes to heaven?*You might think contrasting a Minister for Transport with a Defense Secretary is a case of comparing apples with oranges. But if we dragged the Irish Minister of Defence, ‘Corporal’ Willie O’Dea, we would hardly add gravity to this assessment.**Whenever my compatriots band on about the US leader’s mangling of the language, the words “stones”, “glasshouses”, and “throw” come to mind.