Another example of Rep idiocy

[Skipjack]

Oh and the last time, I checked, California was a Red state.

[Diogenes]

I've read several articles which point out that the quality of education in America is inversely proportional to the quantity of money spent on it.

Hmm, so according to your logic, ivy league universities (which are very expensive) would be worse than a community colleges. Now, there may be quite good community colleges somewhere in the US, but they are not really a match....

Strangely enough, the lessons of History seem to be that it takes an Ivy league education to make a real mess of things. Robert Macnamara comes to mind, as does Woodrow Wilson, etc. Of course these people who wrought so much horrible consequences weren't really science graduates. In that regard, I would have to say the Ivy League Universities are among the best if not the best.

I am all for having more scientists and science minded people

Ok, so we at least have a basis for this conversation

Since when does one need a basis for a conversation? I've seen plenty of baseless conversations. They seem to be the norm, not the exception!

The general idea of the compete programme was still a good one though and I really hate the way the Reps killed it too.

Since the Democrats are currently the majority, why would you say the minority killed it? And why would it be objectionable for anyone to punish government employees for viewing porn on government computers?

What you are actually complaining about is the fact that the Republicans used the rules of the house to do the same thing to democrats that the democrats did to them. You are just objecting about the shoe being on the other foot. [/quote]

It was an act established (one of the few good ones) by the Bush administration, btw.

It might surprise you to discover that *I* am no fan of the Bush Administration. I have repeatedly said that he overlooked the big picture in his obsession with Iraq. The entire middle east was not worth the cost of allowing the stupid/insane Democrats a chance to wreck our economy and our freedom. Bush instituted policies which were completely contrary to Conservative ideas, and bribed party representatives into going along with them. Because Bush opened the door to the Federal Treasury a trickle, he gave the Democrats phony justification to open them to a flood.

People warned him against his excessive spending at the time, and now we have four times the highest level of death defying spending that George Bush ever spent. Bush had no qualms about initiating more government programs like "No child left behind" (a fiasco) and the Pharmacy drug benefit. (also a fiasco)

The only thing George Bush had going for him is that he wasn't as stupid/evil as Al Gore or John Kerry. If I never hear the name of "Bush" in politics again then that will be too soon.

Also, this act had bipartisan support and the support of more than 750 organisations (Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Business Roundtable, the Council on Competitiveness, the Association of American Universities, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, the National Venture Capital Association, TechAmerica, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the American Chemical Society, etc, etc).
It all still seems very silly to me.

Did you happen to read any of the messages left at that website? Among the rest, I particularly liked this one:

5. Joe Says:
May 19th, 2010 at 8:06 pm

Phil. We are trillions of dollars in debt. The dollar is teetering on the edge of collapse, with the euro soon to follow (or possibly preceding). The jobs from the first stimulus package are due to expire within a few years. Our education system is one of the worst in the world (and not through any lack of funding!), and 40 billion dollars is supposed to boost our science. Save your energy and stop being upset about this.

With the exception of the space program (started, if you remember, by an international competition on the grounds of national security), and the atom bomb (also a military enterprise), every single major scientific advancement has come from private enterprise. I seriously doubt that your colleagues that you brought up as anecdotal proof of the great need for this legislation cannot survive without this 40 billion dollars, which I’m SURE would be put to its absolute most efficient use, since it’s coming from the government and all.

While I don’t doubt that this is pure political posturing (if the balance of power were reversed, the Repubs would be all for this, and the Dems would be kicking and screaming), I’m glad to see that the supposed “small government” party is putting its foot down on needless spending. Our country truly CANNOT afford any more.

Other comments were also good.

[Diogenes]

I'd pay money to see you use these kind of stereotyping generalizations with U.S. demographics.

I am not going to do that of course, but if you had ever been to Greece and Italy, you may. It is dirty there and they are not taking care of their cultural heritage (but get EU money to do so). The fact that despite tons of money from the EU, they have barely made any progress is also speaking for itself.
Also, it was Diogenes, who called me to

stayed in Austria and pay for the social spending of the Greeks, the Spanish, the Italians, etc.

I always believed that taxes for social spending should always be payed for by people who support social spending.

Now, why do I have to give away my tax money to them?

Here is the begining of wisdom for you Skipjack.

They have been in the EU longer than Austria has been, so it cant be that they are somehow disadvantaged, can it? So why does their economy suck? The Italians got good parts of Austria. They have access to the sea, we dont, they have natural resources, we dont. They have a much favorable climate. They have the better land. Yet their economy sucks.

Sounds like every Liberal bastion in this Nation. New York, Los Angelos, Detroit, Chicago, etc. Why does their economies suck when they have so much going for them?

[Diogenes]

burn with a great and deep burning passion to hear how, pray tell, the Texans have gone overboard with stupid lately?

Well for starters, this act was shot down due to language added by Rep. Ralph Hall from (surprise) Texas.
Second: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badas ... w-history/
And that is just the latest in a long run of the Texas BoE attacks on science and history.

Oh God! is this a rehash of the "planetaria" thing again? By that I mean an example of something completely trivial in the overall scheme of things being equated to something of extreme significance?

Texas is doing most everything right. It is the national government and liberal state governments that are FUBAR.


It reminds me of the time when George Bush made his announcement that the U.S. Government would only fund SOME stem cell lines. The Next day, we had the Govenator telling us that completely bankrupt California, would defiantly spend even MORE money that it doesn't have to fund MORE stem cell research just to spite the presumed intolerable moralism of George Bush.

My first though was that somebody has a childish sense of priority.

[Diogenes]

Oh and the last time, I checked, California was a Red state.

[DeltaV]

I distinctly remember during the Reagan years that Republican states were colored blue and Democrat states were colored red. When did the news media flip the colors?

[Diogenes]

I distinctly remember during the Reagan years that Republican states were colored blue and Democrat states were colored red. When did the news media flip the colors?

They did it during the first election of Bill Clinton. I objected to it the first time I saw it. Everyone with the slightest knowledge of history and politics know that the color for communists\socialists is Red\Brown. The Conservative\American colors have always been blue. (Colors of the continental army, etc.)

The media has kept it in place as part of the psychological warfare/ propaganda drive. Obviously they don't want their Democrat buddies associated with the communist colors.

[Skipjack]

Since the Democrats are currently the majority, why would you say the minority killed it?

Because it needed a two thirds majority??!!!

And why would it be objectionable for anyone to punish government employees for viewing porn on government computers?

In knew you were going to say that! It is what the Reps wanted. However, the porn thing has NOTHING to do with the science funding. The wording regarding the porn was added into the bill by that Texan Rep. in order to prevent the bill. He was playing a silly political game here. He knew that the bill would not pass with this in it. So he added it. That is why I am so mad.

So when did Arnold turn from a Rep into a Dem?!!
Besides, I thought that Bushes policies cost the US the leadership in stem cell research. That is now in China. US citizes go to China to get their treatments. Well done! Another freeby for China.

[Diogenes]

Since the Democrats are currently the majority, why would you say the minority killed it?

Because it needed a two thirds majority??!!!

Yeah, I know. Perhaps running over the minority when you don't need them wasn't so very smart of the Dems.

And why would it be objectionable for anyone to punish government employees for viewing porn on government computers?

I knew you were going to say that! It is what the Reps wanted. However, the porn thing has NOTHING to do with the science funding. The wording regarding the porn was added into the bill by that Texan Rep. in order to prevent the bill. He was playing a silly political game here. He knew that the bill would not pass with this in it. So he added it. That is why I am so mad.

Why are you not mad at the Democrats for balking at such an agreeable idea? The claim that it wasn't relevant to the bill overlooks the fact that the vast majority of everything congress does isn't relative to the bill currently being voted on. Adding tag along amendments is standard operating procedure.

So when did Arnold turn from a Rep into a Dem?!!

Arnold was always Socially Liberal. For crying out loud, he's married to a Kennedy! However, it was believed prior to his election, that he was fiscally conservative. When he first started, he made attempts to get the state's budget under control, but with enough exposure to the poisons of government power, he eventually flipped to become a profligate spender. It came as a great shocking sadness to the rest of us too.

Besides, I thought that Bushes policies cost the US the leadership in stem cell research. That is now in China. US citizes go to China to get their treatments. Well done! Another freeby for China.

I guess you missed the part about Bush FUNDING stem cell research? What he didn't do, was to allow the funding of Additional stem cell lines, thereby restricting research to EXISTING stem cell lines.

You do know what these terms mean don't you? If so, are you going to argue that there are experiments that cannot be done on existing lines, but that instead MUST REQUIRE new lines? If you believe this, then please explain why any conceivable experiment cannot be performed on the existing lines.

As I have mentioned before, China is uninhibited with any ethical concerns regarding humans and research. This is a distinct advantage. I dare say that any nation willing to use living humans for experiments without any regard for the health or safety of said humans, is very likely going to have an advantage over those who have scruples about this.

[Skipjack]

If you believe this, then please explain why any conceivable experiment cannot be performed on the existing lines.

Because there is not enough of them?

As I have mentioned before, China is uninhibited with any ethical concerns regarding humans and research.

Shallow excuse. You screwed it up, period.

New York

Giuliani was a Rep. Bloomberg is also a Rep. So what are you talking about again?

Strangely enough, the lessons of History seem to be that it takes an Ivy league education to make a real mess of things.

I am not too sure about that, but I guess that we agree on the poin that education at a reputable US university is too expensive for what you get for it?

[JLawson]

I've read several articles which point out that the quality of education in America is inversely proportional to the quantity of money spent on it.

Hmm, so according to your logic, ivy league universities (which are very expensive) would be worse than a community colleges. Now, there may be quite good community colleges somewhere in the US, but they are not really a match....

I don't know, most of the economic debacles we've had in the last few years have been instigated, aided, or abetted by Ivy League alumni. At least the cow college folks understand that 2+2 always equals 4, and that money borrowed needs to be repaid because the interest is a killer.

I don't think they could have done worse, except perhaps sartorially.

[MSimon]

The fault in your thinking is that government programs = more scientists

ITER

[MSimon]

I've read several articles which point out that the quality of education in America is inversely proportional to the quantity of money spent on it.

Hmm, so according to your logic, ivy league universities (which are very expensive) would be worse than a community colleges. Now, there may be quite good community colleges somewhere in the US, but they are not really a match....

I don't know, most of the economic debacles we've had in the last few years have been instigated, aided, or abetted by Ivy League alumni. At least the cow college folks understand that 2+2 always equals 4, and that money borrowed needs to be repaid because the interest is a killer.

I don't think they could have done worse, except perhaps sartorially.

I went to an Ivy of The Midwest. And I have to tell you I am a proud traitor to my class. I have had other alum ask me "how could I?" My answer is "I studied economics and history."

[MSimon]

There is a limited amount of brain power in the world and not all of that brainpower is good at science.

What happens when you have too many programs is that you may get more 2nd rate people in the field trying to do first rate work. This is bad because it is usually the first raters that produce the advances. The 2nd raters can revise and extend those advances.

[MSimon]

I am not too sure about that, but I guess that we agree on the poin that education at a reputable US university is too expensive for what you get for it?

The secret is to have a first rate student and be too poor to pay. Top Universities will pay for talent if they have to.