This is what it has come to. A bunch of science museums afraid of teaching facts about climate change because of moneyed interests not wanting their playtime to end. And the chickens running those places won’t even take a stand. Disgraceful.
I want to rip my hair off whenever I think of this. So, when a bunch of lunatics talk about how the health care reform will kill the their grannys, and make US into a Soviet socialist country, and believe that the president was born in Kenya, things have gone way out of line. Especially that people espouses the line that health care is not a fundamental right? Are you kidding me? You might as well say that having a shelter is not a fundamental right because back in the old days, we used to wander around in savannas hunting with spears. C’mon, people, without an affordable health care, how will one have the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness which you guys (and I) believe in?
Oh, and another thing, Obama doesn’t have spine or guts. He is just an empty slob of skin and meat. When the going got tough, he just gave up on the public option. Look, I am not extremely informed about health care, all right? But there is an appreciable differences in the amount other industrial countries spend, and the fact that everyone in those countries are covered, while at the same time maintaining quality. So, more saving, same quality, everyone wins. And while there probably are legitimate problems with the health care bill, the looneys out there are distracting people away from the real problem, and replacing it with grossly misinformed facts like “death Panels”, the government will kill grannys, that there will be rationing (don’t they know basic economics? limited resources=rationing, all system therefore must ration). I have even heard of pathetic reasoning that suggests medicare is not a government program, which it is. But no, Obama caves in to those lunatics, and drops the option, even if the criticism they had were utter falsehoods. Obama is a coward.
Here is an example of how one deals with looney tunes like Bugs Bunny (Fox News, both equally silly), Daffy Duck (some Republican congress members, both equallly incompetent), and Elmer Fudds (public who are always trying to blow themselves up with the rest of society):
(hat tip Greg Laden for the video)
Ownage. Barney Frank is my temporary hero. You should see Daily Show’s comment on Barney Frank’s takedown. Funny.
That’s okay, though. Politics from my ethnicity, Korea, involved actual fistfights.
Lol, it is funny when O’Reilley tries to play the political accusation game. His defense is so lame.:
Global warming is real, all right? Let’s start with that. We know that because there are evidence (real climate is a great site to inform yourself on this subject). Other people, though, like to twist the evidenceds in their own favor because it is too unpleasant for their own palate. Plus, as always, there are always vested interests, like say… from oil and coal companies, politicians, etc. This blog post shows how a certain politician and denialist from Australia is willing to distort reality in order to maintain their beliefs, even if it is contrary to what is already known. They do it by posing “questions” such as:
“1. Is it the case that CO2 increased by 5 per cent since 1998 whilst global temperature cooled over the same period? If so, why did the temperature not increase; and how can human emissions be to blame for dangerous levels of warming?”
If he would have known anything about it, he would have realized that global warming is a long term thing, and that 2007 is the hottest year on record. Plus, as the blog suggests, that is just cherry picking, data mining, or whatever word which describes the horrible use of data by only choosing parts of it. Of course, you can’t just wish something away just because you don’t like it. Plus, climatologists have data. Why not instead try to solve it before it is too late? After all, it benefits everyone in the long run. And don’t give me the whole it is going to ruin the economy crap.
I am an avid game, well, with school work not as much as I used to, but I try. I like to keep up with gaming news, so I go to a few gaming web sites occasionally. This one, gamepolitics.com is really good, excellent. It is basically about what happens when politics and videogaming mix. (well, that was kind of duh) There are things like:
And some dumb political manufactroversy by the always idiotic media about racism in Resident Evil 5. Though I admit, Eurogamer does have a point, since it is placed to ethnic groups that has long been misrepresented as savages. (jeez, I don’t know, perhaps black zombified people who have lost all ability to reason, you know, thanks to mutant viruses, you know, can’t possibly be violent too! You know, in RE4, the main guy is crushing a white dude’s face, you know, perhaps, I don’t know, you know, he is just a zombie, you know, who lost all humanity! Ya know? Nah, that can’t possibly be it, you know.)(By saying “you know”, I am just imitating normal speech. :) )
…and send this video to five friends. Ok, you guys are not exactly my friends, but at least I have the most amount of audience here.
Vote people, this is an election of utmost importance. We have many issues along the line, like global warming, economic disaster, and Iraq war management. We can’t leave those stuffs to ignoramuses. This country is already ruled by ignoramuses, we don’t need anymore. So, choose the candidate you think is the best, not for partisanship or whatever. Vote candidates for their stance on issues instead. For example, I choose Obama/Biden because not only do they seem more educated, but other than some exceptions, I agree with many of their policies, while McCain seems to be like the usual Republican that has been dominating this country for 8 years. It’s just that the Republicans these days… seem out of touch. Anyways, I oppose most Republicans because of their issues, not the label or whatever muckraking the yellow journalism does these days. I am sure there are decent Reps somewhere… hidden. Anyways, the point is, McCain is no “maverick.”
As you can see from all of the posts in this blog, I deem science very high in importance, especially because it runs so many parts of our lives. I can see some of your faces: “What, I hate science, what do you mean it is running my life?” Well, without scientific progress, the comfort you are experiencing right now at home wouldn’t be there, and the future of our Earth depends on how much we can do good science to protect it.
So, there are two candidates, Obama and McCain. I already made a post about Obama’s answers, so it is McCain’s turn. He finally answered the questions, and here is the post. He says many of the same things that Obama did, except they are less detailed and filled with just a bit mumbo jumbo non sequiturs. While I agree with some of his stuff, I can’t help but think he is just filling in empty promises. I mean, his records on the environment is not that great, he talks about off shore drilling and stuff, and something about bringing corporations to these issues. But I am happy to know he supports the space program.
Anyways, here is his stance on the all important issue of energy:
Over time, I believe that we must reform our entire energy economy toward a sustainable mix of new and cleaner power sources that meet the multiple shared objective of promoting environmental, economic and national security. One of the prevailing issues of our time and the next presidency will be how to deal with the issues of energy security and sustainability. It is important that we shift to sustainable, clean burning energy sources or advance to technologies that make our more traditional resources cleaner burning.
As President, I will put the country on track to building 45 new reactors by 2030 so that we can meet our growing energy demand and reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases. Nuclear power is a proven, domestic, zero-emission source of energy and it is time to recommit to advancing our use of nuclear energy. The U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. Currently, nuclear power provides 20 percent of our overall energy portfolio. Other countries such as China, India and Russia are looking to increase the role of nuclear power in their energy portfolio and the U.S. should not just look to maintain, but increase its own use.
In the progress of other alternative energy sources — such as wind, solar, geothermal, tide, and hydroelectric –government must be an ally but not an arbiter. In less than a generation, wind power alone could account for a fifth or more of all our electricity. And just in recent memory, solar energy has gone from a novelty to a fast-growing industry. I’ve voted against the current patchwork of tax credits for renewable power because they were temporary, and often the result of who had the best lobbyist instead of who had the best ideas. But the objective itself was right and urgent. And when I’m signing laws, instead of casting one of a hundred votes, I intend to see that objective better served. We will reform this effort so that it is fair, rational, and permanent, letting the market decide which ideas can move us toward clean and renewable energy.
I will also commit the federal government to a prosperous clean technology agenda and to becoming the world leader in green technologies. Americans have always been the world’s leaders in innovation, and it’s time for our economy to adapt and take an active role in the new green international economy.
These investments by government into basic research along with aggressive and realistic targets for greenhouse gas emissions will be critical in spurring revolutionary innovations in energy that will, over the long term, reduce energy costs and increase economic growth.
I don’t like the part where he says some of the renewable resources are “just temporary.” So, yeah, make your own choice, but personally, I go with Obama. Oh, and here is a nice website where you can check on the politicians.
It is about time that a candidate responds science based issues. It is my belief that the politicians, as a 21st century candidates, must take science into great importance. Science can help us solve a variety of issues like global warming, health, and good old scienctific exploration. Which is why I am so glad that Obama responded to the questions of 2008 Science Debate. Here is a link to his views. Not only that, his answers are detailed and concise. I would link McCain’s view, but unfortunately, he hasn’t answered any of the questions yet. Here is one of his answer to a question, which is below the fold.