Forums >Off the Beaten Path>Why Is the Republican Field So Extreme?
Well, science should probably be free of politics, inasmuch as possible. Politics should at most set policy around whether a nation will support science, and the scale of that support. But actual decisions about what type of research has scientific value should weigh more heavily on the scientists. Don't get me wrong, if the scientists cannot communicate the value of the science they are pursuing, perhaps there is not much value to communicate. But political ideology from the current party in power should not generally drive scientific discovery. And I think at this point, given a preponderance of evidence, most are looking for federal funding to jump start new energy programs, not to pay for ongoing primary research. C-R, is that what you are proposing to the Fed?
Well, science should probably be free of politics, inasmuch as possible. Politics should at most set policy around whether a nation will support science, and the scale of that support. But actual decisions about what type of research has scientific value should weigh more heavily on the scientists. Don't get me wrong, if the scientists cannot communicate the value of the science they are pursuing, perhaps there is not much value to communicate. But political ideology from the current party in power should not generally drive scientific discovery.
And I think at this point, given a preponderance of evidence, most are looking for federal funding to jump start new energy programs, not to pay for ongoing primary research. C-R, is that what you are proposing to the Fed?
"He conquers who endures" - Persius "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel
http://ncstake.blogspot.com/
Feeling the growl again
reduce energy and water consumption and will cash flow positive.
Now that's just crazy talk right there.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
Indeed
One of the more fundamental differences here is cultural. We Americans feel we should have access to everything, all the time. For everyone. That is our version of universal coverage. However, that is not what really exists in countries that have it. They make tradeoffs to make it work. Doctors make less money....sometimes you have to wait so long for an MRI on your knee that it's too late to fix it...if you're a cancer patient and your disease is no longer curable, you go to hospice with no further treatment. Their societies accept that this is the way it has to be. We don't.
In the UK medical care is not acess to everything all the time- it has the most rationed care according to T. R. Reid. The tradeoffs listed above are true for some countries, not for others- there's quite a difference from country to country.. One of the effective propaganda tools used by opponents of universal care is to say it's all the same in other countries-socialized healthcare. Not true. I encourage you to read the book.
(this is sure a fast moving thread.) Where's that H- bomb?
BTW, ProPublica is publishing a series of nice overviews of each candidate, linking to some of the better media profiles and analyses. So far they've done Bachmann, Paul, and Perry.
Be safe. Be kind.
they went with an unflattering picture of Bachmann!
I for one hope Bachmann wins and names Mike Turner from Ohio as her VP. Overdrive!
Good Bad & The Monkey
in these cases the government is spending money to improve operations and infrastructure while reducing costs.
This is essentially what I meant by jump starting rather than paying for primary research here.
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
Not a "jump start". Pure P&L improvement.
they went with an unflattering picture of Bachmann! I for one hope Bachmann wins and names Mike Turner from Ohio as her VP. Overdrive!
I wish I could find the NYT front page from '08 with Hillary and Obama (there must have been several). The choice of pictures said more than the OP-ED page.
I work at a major media organization (not NYT) one floor below editorial. Currently there are at least a half dozen photos of President Obama looking extremely presidential.
During the previous administration, the only photo to be found of the sitting president was a version of this one.
Granted, it is a great shot.
In the UK medical care is not acess to everything all the time- it has the most rationed care according to T. R. Reid. The tradeoffs listed above are true for some countries, not for others- there's quite a difference from country to country.. One of the effective propaganda tools used by opponents of universal care is to say it's all the same in other countries-socialized healthcare. Not true. I encourage you to read the book. (this is sure a fast moving thread.) Where's that H- bomb?
I'm required to be very familiar with these other systems. I had the priviledge of meeting Purdey last year while I was in the UK meeting with a number of the people who are charged with making these tradeoff decisions.
Damnit Tanya. That was supposed to be on page 15. Pay attention.
Your bomb looks like a recent Republican first lady.
"If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus
Apparently, she was joking...
"I don't know how much God has to do to get the attention of the politicians. We've had an earthquake; we've had a hurricane. He said, 'Are you going to start listening to me here?' Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know government is on a morbid obesity diet and we've got to rein in the spending."
Joking? Maybe. Not sure that I buy it, and regardless, it is maybe too soon...
or cauliflower. kind of all the same really.