 |
| |
|
|
Bosh
|
 |
Taehan Mingook
Jan 1970
time: 00:26
|
|
very interesting blog post I came across:
http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2004/1...epublicans.html
quote:
I Miss Republicans.
No, seriously. Remember Republicans? Sober men in suits, pipes, who'd nod thoughtfully over their latest tract on market-driven fiscal conservatism while grinding out the numbers on rocket science. Remember those serious-looking 1950's-1960's science guys in the movies -- Republican to a one.
They were the grown-ups. They were the realists. Sure they were a bummer, maaaaan, but on the way to La Revolution you need somebody to remember where you parked the car. I was never one (nor a Democrat, really, more an agnostic libertarian big on the social contract, but we don't have a party ...), but I genuinely liked them.
How did they become the party of fairy dust and make believe? How did they become the anti-science guys? The anti-fact guys? The anti-logic guys?
I'm not talking McCain, Hagel, Snowe, or Lugar, here, the cool hard-ass Republicans who still operate in the real world. I'm talking specifically about the guys running the party right now.
Stem cell research? Agin' it.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."-- Why not?
Biggest Surplus to biggest debt, even not counting the war? More tax cuts!
Post-war planning in one of the most divisive Arab communities in the world? Don't need it.
Global warming? No, no it's not.
No WMD's? So what? ... "So what?" SO WHAT?
Conservation? Bigger tax breaks for Hummers than hybrids.
Soldiers need more armor! No, no they don't. Nonny-nonny-nonny ...
Seriously, if I were writing these guys in a script, you'd mock me for stereotyping. And rightfully so. I know, I usually don't get overtly political here. But this is what set me off (via kos):
TEST OF U.S. MISSILE DEFENSE SHIELD FAILS
An attempt to launch an interceptor missile as part of the U.S. missile defence shield failed early Wednesday in the first test of the system in nearly two years ...
(EDIT: Please see this excellent Defense Tech article for the snark-free coverage of this test and its significance. Be sure to follow the link to Jeffrey's excellent article on Arms Control Wonk)
This test, by the way, was cancelled a few days ago because of rain. Because. Of. Rain. And please note that the previous few successes were because the target missle had homing beacons in them, tuned to the exact frequency of the intercepting rockets. Now, you may mock this, but even now, we are negotiating with Iran and North Korea to have all their missiles emit this radio frequency. So joke's on you.
This is what we get for about $100 billion up to now, with about another $100 billion more spent in the next 5 years ... for these test results.
You understand, I'm not against defense spending. I'm not going to rant about how many school lunches this could buy. I'm ranting about junk science.
$100 billion dollars against an attack mode which is literally the most inconvenient, least likely way for bad guys to kill Yanks. Terrorists don't have missiles. Terrorists have VANS. A white-panel-truck defense shield, THAT would be worth our money. Tie the INS database into the Ryder rental computer. Now we're talking science.
At $200 billion we could literally give every person in the Middle East a thousand bucks to look the other way, maybe buy some Nike knock-offs and chill*. If we Fermi Problem it, figuring on just men, 50% down, then just adult men between , say 17-40, knock it down a quarter, then assume fairly effective terrorists need a smattering of English and some technical knowledge, that's down to maybe 10% of our working number ... that's between $50,000 to $80,000 to every reasonably viable terrorist to go out and not vaporize himself. That's good money. That's "let's focus more on the inventing-algebra parts of Islam and slightly less on the jihad aspects while we watch the game on my new big-screen" money. Sure, you're gonna get your martyrs, but hey, that's what the Dept. of Homeland Security is for.
Yes, that suggestion is crazy. It also has EXACTLY THE SAME REAL-WORLD SUCCESS RATIO OF THE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM.
I love how in these articles, the system is always quoted as designed to protect us " ... from rogue states such as North Korea ...". No. No, there are no rogue states "such as" North Korea. It's North Korea, guys. That's it. The only fighter in this weight class. China? They're our biggest foreign asset holder, please. Iran? Jerusalem should worry. The US, not so much . Russian loose nukes? More likely to be broken down for parts for a Van-Based Delivery System (TM) than not -- and year's worth of what we spend on missile defense would be a %2000 increase on what we spend on locking down loose nuclear materials now.
What, are the Phillipines suddenly gonna get all cranked up on non-drowsy cough medicine and decide to go postal on us with their shoddily-made fusion-bomb dancing dashboard figurines? No, when we say " ... rogue states such as North Korea", we mean North Korea. And that means Kim Jong-il. One guy. Simple, fifth-grade logic inexorably draws us to the conclusion that we are spending $200 billion dollars to protect ourselves from one guy.
I'll even SPOT you the argument that we should spend $200 billion on protecting ourselves from one guy. He is, after all, nuts. Probably not so nuts that he'd tip off his super-secret invasion of the southern half of his peninsula by nuking and therefore SUPREMELY pissing off the world's only remaining superpower before he got the tanks rolling, but fine. Nuts. Are you telling me there's no better way to spend $200 billion to stop one guy? What'd it cost the mob to whack Kennedy? $50,000 plus hotel? Even with cost-of-living increase, we can get a better deal here.
If there were a rash of break-ins ... no scratch that. Say there's a violent murder in your neighborhood. A really brutal slayfest. Blood on the walls, body parts on the lawn.
Your neigbor decides to take precautions. He leaves his doors and windows unlocked. He sits on the roof, armed with a SpongeBob SquarePants air-rifle, just in case the killers return and attack the house by hang-glider this time. And the air rifle doesn't work. And he spent EVERY DIME HE HAD on the air rifle.
You would of course, say your neighbor was insane. Or supremely stupid.
You do the rest.
My original point was -- Republicans used to be the guys who put the brakes on this ****. A sad chuckle, a little head shake. "Who's going to pay for this?" they'd say, frowning over national budgets. "Where are the facts? The research?" They'd take out their little red pens and buzzkill our little dreams of nationalized health care or solar-powered windmills or maglev trains, and then go back to banning pornography while secretly screwing around on their wives. But you know what? A lot of times, they were right.
We needed those guys. They were a dull but crucial part of the national dialogue. (And they knew their scotches. ) Now ... a void. Simply put, if you are voting for these guys who call themselves Republicans, then you are voting for crazy air-rifle guy. You just walked up, nodded, and said: "Wow, I gotta get me a ladder."
Please. Please. Bring back the real Republicans. Bring back the science guys. I miss you.
(*Yes, I'm aware not all terrorists are Middle Eastern. But let's face it, the United States' defense policy isn't driven by its fear of Irish thugs and Basque with a grudge. Go with me here.)
|
I wouldn't complain so much if there was even any good third parties 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:26
|
|
there is a point where clean air and the annoyance and cost of it intersect
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:26
|
|
quote:
Q Cubed, you must be joking. Bush ordered reduction in greenhouse gases by various means and Schwarzennegger is taking the lead on this issue in Kalifornia. Bush just wants to go slow and is unwilling to sign a very flawed Kyoto protocol. |
I don't mind ignoring the Kyoto protocol. But y'know, he could have been a bit more, i dunno, diplomatic about it.
quote:
Answer, we have enough stem cells for now. Note that Bush did not order a halt to government support. |
Except we don't. In any case, this doesn't bother me at all. If we lose this tech lead to say, the Asians, which looks quite likely... :shrugs: I, quite frankly, don't care who has tech leadership, as long as someone's going ahead with it. Stifling research has always been a bad idea, and if America's going to do it, pity for them.
quote:
I would suggest that Bush's policies are splitting the difference and taking the middle road. |
The embryos are being thrown away. Not researching with them looks to me like "If I can't have it, nobody can!" 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
quote:
I Miss Republicans
|
Well, you should learn to shoot straight, shouldn't you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Shogun Gunner
|
 |
Potomac Falls, Virginia
Oct 2000
time: 00:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Read: Stem cell debate.
Answer, we have enough stem cells for now. Note that Bush did not order a halt to government support. Bush also mentioned a new law on this topic in his SOTU speech. I just don't recall the details now.
I would suggest that Bush's policies are splitting the difference and taking the middle road. |
There are many scientists who don't agree with this. As with many things, more samples, more experiments -- better scientific results and reliablity in hypothesis, etc.
Just because Bush says there is enough stems cell lines, doesn't mean it's true.
At the company I work at, biological research is one of our business areas. All the scientists, [b]both Republican and Democratic supporters[/n], complain bitterly about the Bush regulations regarding stem cell research, the artificial limits imposed, and they decry the cutting edge research in this area leaving America and going to Europe and Japan.
Not so "pro-business" like Republicans are historically known for. Sounds to me the middle of the road of the religious right perhaps...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
There are many scientists who don't agree with this. As with many things, more samples, more experiments -- better scientific results and reliablity in hypothesis, etc.
Just because Bush says there is enough stems cell lines, doesn't mean it's true.
At the company I work at, biological research is one of our business areas. All the scientists, [b]both Republican and Democratic supporters[/n], complain bitterly about the Bush regulations regarding stem cell research, the artificial limits imposed, and they decry the cutting edge research in this area leaving America and going to Europe and Japan.
Not so "pro-business" like Republicans are historically known for. Sounds to me the middle of the road of the religious right perhaps... |
It is a compromise position that is bound to displease everyone. This is typical, though, of cautious Republicanism.
In Kalifornia, we had a ballot prop to fund stem cell research with 3 billion of Kalifornia money. I voted yes. I understand it passed.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2005 20:07
|