|
Title: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: caesu on October 28, 2008, 02:49:00 AM Quote Sarah Palin's War on Science The GOP ticket's appalling contempt for knowledge and learning. By Christopher Hitchens Posted Monday, Oct. 27, 2008, at 11:43 AM ET In an election that has been fought on an astoundingly low cultural and intellectual level, with both candidates pretending that tax cuts can go like peaches and cream with the staggering new levels of federal deficit, and paltry charges being traded in petty ways, and with Joe the Plumber becoming the emblematic stupidity of the campaign, it didn't seem possible that things could go any lower or get any dumber. But they did last Friday, when, at a speech in Pittsburgh, Gov. Sarah Palin denounced wasteful expenditure on fruit-fly research, adding for good xenophobic and anti-elitist measure that some of this research took place "in Paris, France" and winding up with a folksy "I kid you not." It was in 1933 that Thomas Hunt Morgan won a Nobel Prize for showing that genes are passed on by way of chromosomes. The experimental creature that he employed in the making of this great discovery was the Drosophila melanogaster, or fruit fly. Scientists of various sorts continue to find it a very useful resource, since it can be easily and plentifully "cultured" in a laboratory, has a very short generation time, and displays a great variety of mutation. This makes it useful in studying disease, and since Gov. Palin was in Pittsburgh to talk about her signature "issue" of disability and special needs, she might even have had some researcher tell her that there is a Drosophila-based center for research into autism at the University of North Carolina. The fruit fly can also be a menace to American agriculture, so any financing of research into its habits and mutations is money well-spent. It's especially ridiculous and unfortunate that the governor chose to make such a fool of herself in Pittsburgh, a great city that remade itself after the decline of coal and steel into a center of high-tech medical research. In this case, it could be argued, Palin was not just being a fool in her own right but was following a demagogic lead set by the man who appointed her as his running mate. Sen. John McCain has made repeated use of an anti-waste and anti-pork ad (several times repeated and elaborated in his increasingly witless speeches) in which the expenditure of $3 million to study the DNA of grizzly bears in Montana was derided as "unbelievable." As an excellent article in the Feb. 8, 2008, Scientific American pointed out, there is no way to enforce the Endangered Species Act without getting some sort of estimate of numbers, and the best way of tracking and tracing the elusive grizzly is by setting up barbed-wire hair-snagging stations that painlessly take samples from the bears as they lumber by and then running the DNA samples through a laboratory. The cost is almost trivial compared with the importance of understanding this species, and I dare say the project will yield results in the measurement of other animal populations as well, but all McCain could do was be flippant and say that he wondered whether it was a "paternity" or "criminal" issue that the Fish and Wildlife Service was investigating. (Perhaps those really are the only things that he associates in his mind with DNA.) With Palin, however, the contempt for science may be something a little more sinister than the bluff, empty-headed plain-man's philistinism of McCain. We never get a chance to ask her in detail about these things, but she is known to favor the teaching of creationism in schools (smuggling this crazy idea through customs in the innocent disguise of "teaching the argument," as if there was an argument), and so it is at least probable that she believes all creatures from humans to fruit flies were created just as they are now. This would make DNA or any other kind of research pointless, whether conducted in Paris or not. Projects such as sequencing the DNA of the flu virus, the better to inoculate against it, would not need to be funded. We could all expire happily in the name of God. Gov. Palin also says that she doesn't think humans are responsible for global warming; again, one would like to ask her whether, like some of her co-religionists, she is a "premillenial dispensationalist"—in other words, someone who believes that there is no point in protecting and preserving the natural world, since the end of days will soon be upon us. Videos taken in the Assembly of God church in Wasilla, Alaska, which she used to attend, show her nodding as a preacher says that Alaska will be "one of the refuge states in the Last Days." For the uninitiated, this is a reference to a crackpot belief, widely held among those who brood on the "End Times," that some parts of the world will end at different times from others, and Alaska will be a big draw as the heavens darken on account of its wide open spaces. An article by Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times gives further gruesome details of the extreme Pentecostalism with which Palin has been associated in the past (perhaps moderating herself, at least in public, as a political career became more attractive). High points, also available on YouTube, show her being "anointed" by an African bishop who claims to cast out witches. The term used in the trade for this hysterical superstitious nonsense is "spiritual warfare," in which true Christian soldiers are trained to fight demons. Palin has spoken at "spiritual warfare" events as recently as June. And only last week the chiller from Wasilla spoke of "prayer warriors" in a radio interview with James Dobson of Focus on the Family, who said that he and his lovely wife, Shirley, had convened a prayer meeting to beseech that "God's perfect will be done on Nov. 4." This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity. Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and the author of God Is Not Great. Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2203120/ << includes links i often do no agree with Hitchens. for example his opinion on the War in Iraq. but lately he has been spot on regarding McCain/Palin. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on October 28, 2008, 09:23:59 AM What . . . no mention of wardrobe? I'm shocked!
Guess we won't be able to cut anything under an Obama Administration. In times of economic stress, let's PUSH THE PORK! Euro-Centrics (and Centrics for everybody except Americans) are outraged that we won't want to send money to France. This is PORK FOR FRANCE. If you're going to pass the PORKPIE, the least you could do is give OUR MONEY to US. If the research were that important, someone else would fund it. Your Money Funding the World, when your pocketbook is screaming. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on October 28, 2008, 09:33:17 AM Quote (...) As an excellent article in the Feb. 8, 2008, Scientific American pointed out, there is no way to enforce the Endangered Species Act without getting some sort of estimate of numbers, . . . I have some news for Christopher Hitchins: WE ARE THE ENDANGERED SPECIES! Our American way of life is about to be squashed and stuffed into a tube to be flushed down the toilet. If Hitchins is so excited about Grizzley Bear DNA, he can fund a group of Congress People to try collecting sperm. I'd suggest Barney Frank as Chairman. Might be easier than you think . . . people would contribute to see a tape of it. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on October 28, 2008, 10:59:52 AM ::MonkeyDance:: ::MonkeyDance:: ::MonkeyHaHa:: ::MonkeyHaHa::
I'd buy a ticket to that! Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: caesu on October 29, 2008, 07:35:48 AM apparently Palin is not the only one who takes pride in ignorance and if she doesn't understand the scientific research she thinks it is ok to cut the spending.
thank God she will never be president or vice-president. else Americas high standing in the scientific community would detoriate to pre-Middle Ages standards. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on October 30, 2008, 03:30:32 AM apparently Palin is not the only one who takes pride in ignorance and if she doesn't understand the scientific research she thinks it is ok to cut the spending. thank God she will never be president or vice-president. else Americas high standing in the scientific community would detoriate to pre-Middle Ages standards. If the polls are the determination of who wins and are accurate and continue where they are today, you are right, McCain or Palin will not take office. If that happens, it will be a result of an election. It is seperate from any issue of right and wrong. The merits of the issues aren't what is driving this election. Howard Stern aptly demonstrated that when he sent a reporter to Harlem asking folks who they were voting for. The majority of the answers were "Obama". When asked if they liked Palin as Obama's VP choice, or that Obama felt we should remain in Iraq for a long time, the answers were a resounding "Yeah, Man!" In fairness, the one guy who said he was voting for McCain thought Biden as McCain's VP was a dandy choice, too. This election isn't being decided on the issues for most voters and the issues won't change after it is over any more than what is right or what is wrong. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: caesu on October 30, 2008, 01:27:43 PM yes, i listened to that Howard Stern tape too.
i course there are very dumb folks on both sides. if you interview enough people you will always get a few really dumb answers. but a McCain/Palin administration will be disastrous for science and education in America. then you are going to see a lot of projects going overseas. as a result a enormous amount of jobs are going to disappear. so thank God all signs show they are not going to win. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on October 31, 2008, 01:38:49 PM Christopher Hitchins has fed at the Leftist/Socialist trough most of his life. I wonder that he slipped from his friendly surroundings to deliver his rhetoric to us.
Quote This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity. Ah Christopher, “despise science and learning?” I doubt that. The mind of an intellectual and social elitist is a wonder. Coming from a social group where the attitude of superiority is rampant, I doubt you understand straight talk, plain talk, and the ability to cut through the murk. I doubt you appreciate the ability to use “common sense,” when you have the ability to draw from the elitist’s pool of vastly superior intellectual power. We, the “intellectually slothful,” do care about the Constitution! “We, the People” can understand the Power and Safety which the Constitution provides to each and every one of us. My ancestors helped form this Nation. My ancestors cared for the Constitution and Our Country. Eight generations of Americans have worked in an effort to preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution. I have voted in elections over a longer period of time than you have spent in this Country. Your attitude and intellectual superiority is trumped by our “slothful” care of and for our Constitution; and your autocratic bullies are trumped by our “people of faith,” people of hope; and by OUR PEOPLE PROMOTING FREEDOM. I doubt your words; I doubt your motives; I doubt you have much to contribute to those who do not value snobbery/elitism, socialism. For all your promotion, when and if the Socialists come for us . . . they will come for the elitist, the intellectuals, the print media—the very strong mouthpieces who supported them. Socialism cannot tolerate a very strong voice which might turn against them. You’re among the first in line, Mr. Hitchins. Promoting Socialism and Obama are likely to find you “hoist on your own petard” or, under these circumstances, willfully committing verbal suicide. Common sense trumps arrogance every time. I doubt you will find common sense from your high tower. Sadly, I doubt you could recognize it, if it tapped you on the shoulder. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: nonesuche on October 31, 2008, 08:33:55 PM I could not agree more Slogger, so very well said indeed.
Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: truthseeker2 on October 31, 2008, 08:37:58 PM Quote (...) As an excellent article in the Feb. 8, 2008, Scientific American pointed out, there is no way to enforce the Endangered Species Act without getting some sort of estimate of numbers, . . . I have some news for Christopher Hitchins: WE ARE THE ENDANGERED SPECIES! Our American way of life is about to be squashed and stuffed into a tube to be flushed down the toilet. If Hitchins is so excited about Grizzley Bear DNA, he can fund a group of Congress People to try collecting sperm. I'd suggest Barney Frank as Chairman. Might be easier than you think . . . people would contribute to see a tape of it. I tend to discard the opinions of an atheist. Hitchens can worry about the bears. We need to worry about the entire country. The Messiah has 'adjusted' his foreign policy message since the end of the primaries. Please take the time to watch this video. It may be one of the most important ones you watch this election season. Yes, I am aware of the interest and concern about the economy, but that will mean nothing if we do not secure our country. The non-U.S. libs that are posting here can make all the comments they like, but this is my country that is at stake here...not yours. I say that in a respectful way and do not want to hurt feelings here, but we do have different interests. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sj91NH5fvw Slogger, I would love to get your comments about this along with anyone else here who is concerned about the U.S. and how this country will end up with the Messiah in the White House. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on November 01, 2008, 03:58:00 AM That's an excellent video, Truthseeker. Thank you for bringing it here. I have forwarded it to contacts in my address book, and hope others will do the same.
I'm not sure that we need to fear outside attack from terrorists. In a scenario where Obama is in the White House, I think the objective is being accomplished from within. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on November 01, 2008, 01:05:15 PM Truth "seer"
Quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sj91NH5fvw Slogger, I would love to get your comments about this along with anyone else here who is concerned about the U.S. and how this country will end up with the Messiah in the White House. The video is good; although, I suspect those who watch it already know. Those who ignore it could remain ignorant, until surprised. Clinton watched, but did not act; Bush saw . . . and responded. I thank Bush for it; if he had not acted we would have been in more danger. FEAR IS A TACTIC. AWARENESS and KNOWLEDGE ARE POWER and PROTECTION WHEN SWIFT ACTION IS NECESSARY. Obama is either unaware, or doesn’t care. It is dangerous. The events of 9/11 were not a made for television movie, they were all too real. It was not a mirage. SAFE . . . BUT WEAK, is neither a good tactic, nor a viable strategy. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: truthseeker2 on November 01, 2008, 06:33:07 PM Oh, I think Obama knows. See, it has yet to be determined if he is a useful idiot or if he is relly at the top. He wants this to happen. No one could possibly spout the "spread the wealth around" comment without having marxist views.
If he manages to pull this off, there will be a counter-revolution. You can count on that. I have spoken to so many people that have bought new firearms and some that have bought them for the first time. They are preparing because they believe that a McCain win will lead to violence in the streets and an Obama win will leave them in a position to have to defend themselves against a communist government. Either way, I will never acknowledge Obama as my 'President' and I hope to survive a McCain presidency. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: A's Fever on November 01, 2008, 07:43:45 PM That's an excellent video, Truthseeker. Thank you for bringing it here. I have forwarded it to contacts in my address book, and hope others will do the same. I'm not sure that we need to fear outside attack from terrorists. In a scenario where Obama is in the White House, I think the objective is being accomplished from within. I don't understand this view and why things on YouTube are taken so seriously. Even McCain said he (Obama) is a good man. Certainly Powell would not deliver us into the hands of the enemy. What about the people who have worked with him over the years? Who, among senators with which he had worked on committees and discussed bills, who, at University, who in the neighborhood has ever looked into this man's eyes and said he is evil? To beware of him? That his views are leftist, yes, that is widely documented. But the suggestion is that he has fooled everyone around him except those savvy YouTube posters seems quite a stretch to me. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on November 01, 2008, 08:08:32 PM Interesting point, A's.
My opinion is that when the vast majority in the main stream media endorse a candidate rather than cover the news on one, people look elsewhere for questions they want answers to. I've also noticed that the meat and characteristics of some YouTube videos, has taken on a more serious and well researched quality, probably in response to the same thing. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on November 01, 2008, 08:43:21 PM Spread the Wealth/Maxism is a reasonable suspicion, imo.
The young guy on the video ("Bullseye" thread) gave a great explanation of Obama's tax plan that it wasn't even "trickle up" (which doesn't work) it was EVAPORATIVE ECONOMICS. That's exactly what I think it will be. Obama spreads your money at the bottom, and it evaporates. His explanation of the party differences is interesting. The race isn't over until the last vote is counted (or recounted.) It might take a while. Election is about who is worse for us; this time it is clearly about who is worse for the country. IMO, the only hope we have to get out of this mess is slow and steady McCain. The job wouldn't be easy for anyone. Any negatives are offset by firm purpose, trying his best to adhere to his standards, experience, and COUNTRY. As much as people love to Pick on Palin, her mind is focused on Country; her heart is with the people. She understands far more than Barack. Barack will follow the path taught to him; Sarah will try her best to follow her conscience, and stay on a straight path--not a crooked road. Palin has a clear sense of right and wrong that is not found in the opposition. So, if McCain/Palin win I will be content that they will try their best. If Obama/Biden win, well . . . that's a longer discussion. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on November 01, 2008, 09:08:05 PM Quote I don't understand this view and why things on YouTube are taken so seriously. Even McCain said he (Obama) is a good man. Certainly Powell would not deliver us into the hands of the enemy. What about the people who have worked with him over the years? Who, among senators with which he had worked on committees and discussed bills, who, at University, who in the neighborhood has ever looked into this man's eyes and said he is evil? To beware of him? That his views are leftist, yes, that is widely documented. But the suggestion is that he has fooled everyone around him except those savvy YouTube posters seems quite a stretch to me. The Net and YouTube are working toward being the new free press. This election, it was more than biased press and channels. We saw cover up, and mask. We saw prop-O-ganda. Freedom of speech was curtailed; Politically Correct was required. Stiffled speech, and one-sided rules applied. A guy who asked a question was raked over the coals. A reporter, who finally asked an appropriate question, was banned, purposely excluded. Not good, and it creates grave concerns. If you don't provide logical answers to legitimate questions, suspicions are formed. If those suspicions are not resolved, more questions arise. The cycle continues to repeat, and the situation grows worse. We are almost as much in the dark about one candidate as we were months ago. This is the candidate's fault. Snickering jibes are not answers; bannings are not answers. The questions are multiplying exponentially, as are the concerns. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: KYcat on November 01, 2008, 09:46:00 PM snipped/ Slogger, I would love to get your comments about this along with anyone else here who is concerned about the U.S. and how this country will end up with the Messiah in the White House. snipped/ I'm not Slogger, but he is dead on. Truthseeker2 and CBB are too. The "Messiah" is scary and I can't understand how he has cast a spell over so many people. Ignorance is not bliss in this case, America better wake up and fast. If Obama ends up in the White House, Americans better learn how to be self-sufficient and defend their own. Obama's allegance lies elsewhere........not with the United States of America. His name is Barrack Hussein Obama. Wake the hell up America! Democracy and freedom may very well be thing of the past if Obama is elected. God help us. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: Slogger on November 01, 2008, 10:25:26 PM We have election work to do all over the Net, and in our State.
Next the vote; then, the count. Either way, one direction is very clear . . .Abolish ACORN and it's numerous affiliations. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: A's Fever on November 02, 2008, 12:26:42 AM Spread the Wealth/Maxism is a reasonable suspicion, imo. The young guy on the video ("Bullseye" thread) gave a great explanation of Obama's tax plan that it wasn't even "trickle up" (which doesn't work) it was EVAPORATIVE ECONOMICS. That's exactly what I think it will be. Obama spreads your money at the bottom, and it evaporates. His explanation of the party differences is interesting. The race isn't over until the last vote is counted (or recounted.) It might take a while. Election is about who is worse for us; this time it is clearly about who is worse for the country. IMO, the only hope we have to get out of this mess is slow and steady McCain. The job wouldn't be easy for anyone. Any negatives are offset by firm purpose, trying his best to adhere to his standards, experience, and COUNTRY. As much as people love to Pick on Palin, her mind is focused on Country; her heart is with the people. She understands far more than Barack. Barack will follow the path taught to him; Sarah will try her best to follow her conscience, and stay on a straight path--not a crooked road. Palin has a clear sense of right and wrong that is not found in the opposition. So, if McCain/Palin win I will be content that they will try their best. If Obama/Biden win, well . . . that's a longer discussion. I don't know about trickle down and trickle up stuff, Slogger, and I am no economist, but look who Obama has as his economic advisors. Warren Buffet is not exactly a socialist. He has publicly criticized the tax code in the past, however, saying that it is patently unfair that his secretary pays more in taxes than he does (dollar for dollar). It would be hard to argue with this. Other advisors include Paul Volcker and Larry Summers, both Republicans with service in Republican administrations. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on November 02, 2008, 12:35:28 AM Franklin Raines and James Johnson don't add to the shine on Obama's advisors.
Johnson earned $21 million in just his last year at Fannie Mae, where he served as CEO from 1991 to 1998. Raines earned $90 million in his five years as Fannie Mae CEO, from 1999 to 2004. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75998 Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: A's Fever on November 02, 2008, 01:00:59 AM Interesting point, A's. My opinion is that when the vast majority in the main stream media endorse a candidate rather than cover the news on one, people look elsewhere for questions they want answers to. I've also noticed that the meat and characteristics of some YouTube videos, has taken on a more serious and well researched quality, probably in response to the same thing. They may have taken on a more serious and well researched quality, and, as Slogger says, the "Net and Youtube are working toward being a new free press". I don't disagree, but feel that we still need to be very careful about the information we choose to receive and believe, because it can be easily manipulated on the Net. If you believe some of this stuff about Obama because it seems well researched and plausible, then I assume you also believe that Trig Palin is really Bristol's baby not Sarah's, because there is some very serious research out there (photos, timelines, interviews) that makes this seem plausible. And she hasn't releaed her medical records yet. Now I don't for a moment believe any of this is true, but there are some pretty compelling arguments that make you go "huh?" I believe that is true of Obama also. And I think that is the way smear campaigns work, they just try to plant a seed of doubt. Look at the Obama birth certificate thing. We have Berg who brought a suit that was thrown out, and there is someone in another state trying to get Obama off the ballot. So a couple of grass roots movements. But things get done where there is power and money, so where is the White House on this, the Republican Party, the RNC, the FBI, the CIA, all those resources at the hands of the current admin? They have had four years since he became a shining star at the 2004 convention. Don't you think they would have discredited Obama on this issue much earlier if they had just cause? Politics in not about people playing nice - they would have had Obama's head on a platter if they could because it certainly would have been better for McCain to run against the less popular Hillary Clinton than the popular and charismatic Obama. So I don't buy this stuff about the birth certificate. (Even if this goes to the Supreme Court after Obama takes office and he is found not to be a citizen, wouldn't Biden then become president? The democrats would still retain the office so how would that strategy work?) Why won't Obama release the document if he has nothing to hide? I don't know. But then, why won't Sarah Palin release her medical records if she has nothing to hide? I don't know that either. But saying either, or both, have something to hide, seems ridiculous under the circumstances. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: crazybabyborg on November 02, 2008, 03:07:37 AM I don't know where Palin's medical records are. She announced she would produce them, and I would have thought they would be out there by now. I'll say this, they should be, just as Obama's should be. A one page letter is not medical records and he's had a lot longer than Palin.
I haven't lit on Obama's birth certificate although I'm aware of the issue. I've said it before, but the only reason my curiosity was peeked is because he hasn't just cleared it up, which seems like such an easy thing to do. I'll say the same about Palin if her records don't show up. I will say that her records will be gone through to see if there is any reason that could be construed as contributing to the possibility of having a child with Down's Syndrome, and it may very well be that the McCain campaign would prefer that so close to the election the discussions center around the issues before the voters rather than the Palin medical record sideline. That may be justified, and it may not be, but I can see that possibility. A's, the videos on YouTube that have caught my interest are those with footage from news clips that aren't generally familiar to a lot of people. The video of Obama campaigning for Odinga, and the supporting clips from CNN are of interest to me. That incredibly important episode hasn't been a part of this campaign coverage at all, and they should have been. It depicts part of Obama's record and his record is very thin. I make judgments on actions far more than I do words. When I hear Obama say he'll cut taxes for the middle class and define that as anyone making under 250K, I want to see how he has defined the middle class in the past, before he was actively trying to move into the white house. Here, on youtube that is available: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzHhmhba8qA Taking his own words here as 50, 60, 70 thousand a year tells me that in 2003, that was his definition. A reporter of a free press should have asked him long ago to explain what has caused him to redefine the middle class in that length of time. But, since no one has, it just hangs there. But at least it is asked. It's up to Obama to answer it or not, but should he choose not to, or should he choose not to produce his birth certificate, or medical records, or discuss his Odinga relationship, or anything else, then he will become the subject of doubt. That's the American people's freedom that used to be largely satisfied through a free press. Someone raised the Keating association about McCain. It's a fair topic. The difference is that McCain has faced the questions. McCain has faced the investigation. McCain didn't run from the answers. We have a record to judge, and a basis to make a decision. Obama has consistently avoided and dodged, and has also been given a pass. Americans have a need to know, and I don't ever want us to just accept that if we need to know, the media will tell us. That arrangement is broken in this election. Believe it or not, I followed the primaries and convention of both parties, and did not begin this election cycle devoted to a party. McCain was not my choice. As things unfolded, and I began to hear the plans, I made up my mind. When I heard Obama was going to raise the capital gains tax, I knew that Clinton had attempted to do the same thing, and found that LESS revenue was generated, and he had to again lower it. I remembered that very fact had come up in a primary debate with Hillary, so I went to YouTube to look, and here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8 Let me ask you something. If you watched the above video, do you give it more weight than if I had just posted the fact? Yes, there were a few messages added, but you had the ability to evaluate the demeanor and context of the answer without taking my word for it. The economy wasn't in the same crisis in April as it is now. Now it's even more important to look at this and evaluate what we are about to do. I know from this video that for Obama, the issue is "fairness" over generating revenue. He wants to level the playing field, which has brought him accusations of socialism, more than he wants to strengthen the American economy. The over zealous attempts at fairness created the situation where loans to people without jobs could obtain mortgages, and led to overwhelming corruption, and a financial crisis that history teaches us could very well turn into depression IF we raise taxes to address it. The issues couldn't be more important and our media isn't getting to them. YouTube can be an extremely useful tool in the absense of an unbiased free press, and it's just unfortunate that it's all we seem to have. Title: Re: Sarah Palin's War on Science Post by: truthseeker2 on November 02, 2008, 03:20:54 PM Warren Buffet, and many at his economic level, will not be impacted by the Obama economics as much as the small businesses will be. Think about this. Buffet indicated that he had no problem with the death tax where the government takes a great deal of what we leave to our children. These are the things WE worked for that the government will be taking more of instead of allowing us to decide who gets it. Buffet has enough money and has set his kids up through non-profits and trusts that the government cannot touch. People like us do not have that kind of money. So for Buffet to support Obama as some type of economic advisor is even more reason for me to vote against him. Just because someone made a lot of money does not allows extrpolate into knowing what will work for everyone else.
|