More Comments on McCain and his Anti-Science Ways

The post I put up has well over one hundred responses, and almost all of them are worth reading and see the idiot that McCain truly is. Here a couple of highlighted ones:

Mike Haubrich, FCD Says:

September 16th, 2008 at 4:05 am
When William Proxmire was the Senator from Wisconsin he used to issue an annual “Golden Fleece” report, in which he listed what he thought were the worst examples of government spending. I used to read his reports, and he would often list science experiments as wasteful spending. The problem with his reports is that without having details on the study he was referring to, we really didn’t know the context of the study. One of the few examples I remember was a grant for $45,000 for a Navy study on the efficacy of using frisbee’s for grenade delivery devices.

When Proxmire was Senator, I believe that most government science funding was run through agencies to review grant proposals and evaluate funding based on sound criteria. The complaint now, and I think it is a valid one, is that too much funding is now done through the House Ways and Means committee through amendments to spending bills. If I thought McCain was serious about trying to fight this, I would be encouraged by his tough talk on earmarks. I think that he is far too aware of how his allies on the Hill get their campaign funds to make a serious effort to cut ear-marking. If he becomes president he will get zilch support for any legislation he tries to get through if he cuts off his congressional support by being serious on earmarking.

Finally, one of the knocks on Palin is that she sought an earmark for funding a study on the sex lives of Alaskan crabs. It’s not the study of the sex lives of Alaskan crabs that should be the issue. With a diminishing fishery, I think that knowing how more about their sex habits is vital. The knock should be that it is funded through an earmark, not that it is being funded.

I agree with Bigfoot. Earmarking science is a problem both for the budget and for science.

Funding planetariums should not be done in Congress, Congress should be funding the agencies that allocate funds based on the strength of the grant application and not based on the desire of the senator or congressperson whose district would house the planetarium. I say build them, but not from Congress. And I think that a president who thinks they are foolish should not be anywhere near a veto pen when it comes to science funding.

Ragutis Says:

September 16th, 2008 at 5:01 am
Steve: Posts with links are often held up for approval. Unless the site linked to is inappropriate or non-family friendly, I expect it’ll show up.

I saw this coming since the first Republican debate where the evolution question came up. He didn’t raise his hand with the real wack-a-loons, but had to jump in and do some laughably transparent religious pandering with that trite caveat: “But whenever I hike the Grand Canyon, I see the work of God’s hand.”

After getting sabotaged and trounced in 2000 by someone he well knows to be an idiot, he’s pulled out all the stops and shed the last of his dignity and scruples. He’s gonna get elected even if he has to hire the same goons that keelhauled him and play as dirty as Rove and Co. Forget Iraq, to him this election is the battle that must be won at all costs.

It’s bound to backfire. A slim majority of the voting public will recognize his resemblance to Bush and Janus, not to mention see through the wingnuttery of Palin and vote for Obama. Especially with Wall Street and the economy tumbling down around our ears. It would take one hell of an October surprise for McSame to pull this off. Unless he’s got Bin Laden tied up in one of those 7 homes, I just don’t see it happening.

As for Biden. He was certainly one of the best people Obama could choose. He’s popular, experienced, and good on foreign policy. Sure, in hindsight, a fringe or outside the box pick might have been better, but how was Obama supposed to know McCain would end up choosing Caribou Barbie? He was determined to go with Lieberman up to the very last minute. Hence the lack of vetting, her unpreparedness, and everybody on the Right saying “Wha?” along with the rest of us when she was announced. Seriously, she is NOT the best the Republican party has to offer. Not even the best woman they have, not by a longshot. All she is is the lipstick on the pig of his 4 more years policies and a desperate plea to the likes of the Dobsons and Robertsons and their sheep begging “Elect me and then you can have her. Give me one term and you’ll have one of yours in place for a run in 2012 and with a big headstart.”

And planetariums rule. The one at the Dreher Park Zoo was fundamental in kindling my interest in astronomy waaaay back in the day. Along with public libraries and natural history/science museums, they must certainly be one of the most valuable “luxury” assets a community can have.

CS Says:
September 16th, 2008 at 8:23 am

JohnW: So, Palin is not antiscience?

Despite the advice of almost 200 scientists against aircraft hunting of wolves and bears, she opposed the Measure 2 bill (using $400,000 of state funds).

She opposed the listing of the polar bears in the Endangered Species Act, suing the Federal Government, regardless of the fact that there is massive scientific evidence of population declines and habitat loss.

She is against embryonic stem cell research.

She supports the teaching of creationism in schools.

She doubts that global warming is man made.

She supports drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge.

Her position is almost totally against sound science.

She certainly scares me!