How to eliminate this?

[swansont]

But Swansont, none of what you said will even occur. If that were the case. Then our current president would already be impeached. Eric Holder would be in jail. Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid would both be locked up as well. John Boehner would be facing several criminal charges. Just to name a few! Not even counting our esteemed California congressmen and senators. Which is a whole different ball of wax!

 

Sorry, WTF? Jail? Impeachment? My examples for jail were criminal acts: fraud, libel and slander. Without examples, this is meaningless. Even with examples I expect this will be meaningless.

 

As far as being called on it in the press, are you serious? Obama, et al. aren't pilloried daily on FOX ? (Not to mention often for doing the very same things that GOPers never got any grief for) and criticized elsewhere? People don't fact-check statements made by the left? Really?

[jduff]

 

Sorry, WTF? Jail? Impeachment? My examples for jail were criminal acts: fraud, libel and slander. Without examples, this is meaningless. Even with examples I expect this will be meaningless.

 

As far as being called on it in the press, are you serious? Obama, et al. aren't pilloried daily on FOX ? (Not to mention often for doing the very same things that GOPers never got any grief for) and criticized elsewhere? People don't fact-check statements made by the left? Really?

My ohh my.. a bit one sided swansont. American news turns out propaganda 24/7/365. This includes FOX, MSNBC,CBS, ABC,CNN.. all the major news networks., After all satis magnum alter alteri theatrum sumus (Epicurus).

 

I hope you are ready. Many of the democrat supporters which are billionaires are leaving the U.S high and dry! This includes George Soros. Who in the past month has been selling off his U.S assets.

 

Glad you have such faith in our media.

[swansont]

My ohh my.. a bit one sided swansont. American news turns out propaganda 24/7/365. This includes FOX, MSNBC,CBS, ABC,CNN.. all the major news networks., After all satis magnum alter alteri theatrum sumus (Epicurus).

 

I hope you are ready. Many of the democrat supporters which are billionaires are leaving the U.S high and dry! This includes George Soros. Who in the past month has been selling off his U.S assets.

 

Glad you have such faith in our media.

 

 

I must assume you get your straw at extremely good rates to build such arguments.

 

I made no claim about news organizations not churning out propaganda, and said nothing about billionaires. Perhaps you could address the arguments I make, instead of ones you have fabricated, and respond to the questions that people ask without the tap-dancing.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

An interesting but conspiratorial point: even if you do believe that climate change is real, but do not think it is the government's role or duty to address it (or think the remedies are worse than the problem), pretending to be a moron is an incredibly effective obstruction tactic.

 

So if someone believes that action on climate change would kill the American economy by excess regulation, then it's best for them to pretend climate change is a liberal myth.

[swansont]

An interesting but conspiratorial point: even if you do believe that climate change is real, but do not think it is the government's role or duty to address it (or think the remedies are worse than the problem), pretending to be a moron is an incredibly effective obstruction tactic.

 

 

Doesn't that require the electorate who supports that person to also be either morons or exceedingly apathetic/uninformed? (Not that this is a stumbling block in any way for this scenario)

[Dekan]

I'm an outsider to the American political system. But I get the impression that Republicans will fund Science and Technology.

 

Whereas Democrats will spend all the money on Welfare.

 

Is that too simple a view?

[iNow]

I get the impression that Republicans will fund Science and Technology.

 

Whereas Democrats will spend all the money on Welfare.

 

Is that too simple a view?

Both simple and wrong given the actual history here, especially during the last decade or so (at least for science and tech, but frankly it appears that Republicans don't really want to fund anything other than military lately, and even there they are failing with veterans and veteran benefits once they return home).

 

See the "In Search of Funding" section below for more on the science side of this question:

 

[toastywombel]

Both simple and wrong given the actual history here, especially during the last decade or so (at least for science and tech, but frankly it appears that Republicans don't really want to fund anything other than military lately, and even there they are failing with veterans and veteran benefits once they return home).

 

While I agree with your overall point iNow and respect your knowledgeable opinion. It should be noted that some of the money that congress allocates for military expenditures is used for scientific research. (Of course usually its scientific research limited in the scope of providing a military advantage).

 

But I think it should be noted that military spending has brought about significant scientific advancements, however at the same time those advancements could have been achieved through other conduits than simply military research.

My ohh my.. a bit one sided swansont. American news turns out propaganda 24/7/365. This includes FOX, MSNBC,CBS, ABC,CNN.. all the major news networks., After all satis magnum alter alteri theatrum sumus (Epicurus).

 

I hope you are ready. Many of the democrat supporters which are billionaires are leaving the U.S high and dry! This includes George Soros. Who in the past month has been selling off his U.S assets.

 

Glad you have such faith in our media

Where did you hear that many billionaires are leaving the U.S?

 

Also, how do you know George Soros is selling off his U.S assets? Furthermore, given the vast amount of investments he has, how do you define "U.S asset" in this now global economy??

[iNow]

It should be noted that some of the money that congress allocates for military expenditures is used for scientific research.

Of course, and I don't disagree. However, I would still classify that as military spending since the underlying objective is to further various military aims, not to advance scientific knowledge, research, or understanding.

 

In much the same way, a lot of military spending is put towards advances in training and improvements in the ability to practice for and ready the troops for the execution of missions. However, I do not think it would be appropriate to classify that spending is going toward "education."

 

If they happen to arrive at a new process or improved method to conduct said training, then potentially that will cascade out into the broader populace someday. However, at best that could be considered a secondary or even tertiary objective and not the original objective of the spending, and it's the same with scientific research and advances, IMO.

 

If one is trying to argue that a given political party prioritizes spending on science, then we shouldn't have to make such a circuitous argument laden with mental gymnastics and logical zigzags to see how our appropriations are truly directed towards science.

 

 

On another note, I encourage you not to chase jduffs red herring. While one could access George Soros financial information online, one example is merely an anecdote. It is not evidence that ought to lead a rational mind to the conclusion that left-leaning billionaires are fleeing US economy en masse. It is a completely non sequitur assertion, and it's also completely tangential to the actual topic being discussed here.