Monthly Archives: October 2007

Government Funding of Science: Inherently Susceptible to Junk and Superstition.

Abortion, Democracy, Environment, Technology, Theory and Ideas

I recently discovered the thoroughly enjoyable podcast put out by Skepticality magazine, and was browsing through some past ‘casts, when I stumbled across an interview (in Podcast #59) with Lori Lipman-Brown, a lobbyist in the employ of the Secular Coalition of America. The interview was pretty wide ranging, but at one point it focused on a battle in the U.S. House of Representatives concerning stem cell research. She recounted how House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had attempted to use an interpretation of Christian theology to buttress her position. She criticized Nancy Pelosi as follows:

“We were flabbergasted when we heard her start saying that ‘stem cells are a gift from God’ and that ‘stemcell research is biblically based’ in her arguments. I mean she was going to vote the right way, but this was her argument to get other people to vote the right way. And the reason this is really horrific is-our argument is whether or not you allow stem cell research to progress shouldn’t be based on your theology, because if it is just a competition between whose theology is right. I mean President Bush, when he vetoes these bills, he bases it on God and the Bible also and his interpretation. … Making this a competition of whose theology wins is not appropriate. What you need to do is to say ‘Look this is science, this is not – we can’t have the government imposing anyone’s theology – you know, this is research, this is not about what someone’s religious belief is.” – I transcribed this myself – any deviation from what was actually said is a mistake rather than malice – tarran

In effect, she was opposed to a minority being able to block some bit of government funding for research based on moral objections rooted in superstitious beliefs.

Roman Scientific Research Into Agricultural ForecastingThis seems a reasonable position at first blush, but is, in fact, a highly immoral and, frankly impossible proposition. Let us turn to our old friends the Nazis for a demonstration, since they make for great reductio ad absurdum argumentation. » Read more

tarran
I am an anarcho-capitalist living just west of Boston Massachussetts. I am married, have two children, and am trying to start my own computer consulting company.
https://thelibertypapers.org/author/tarran/

Is Ron Paul Close To 10% In New Hampshire ?

Election '08, Politics

A new poll being released today seems to suggest that the answer is yes:

St. Anselm College’s Institute of Politics will release a new poll today, completed by SRBI Research in New York City, showing that Clinton and Romney hold solid leads in New Hampshire.

The survey of 1,514 likely primary voters has margins of error of 4.1 percent for Democrats, 4.5 percent for Republicans and 4.8 percent for undecided voters. It was conducted Oct. 15 to 21.

It shows Democrat Clinton leading Obama 42.6 to 21.5 percent, with John Edwards at 13.9 percent. Among Republicans, Romney leads Giuliani 32.4 to 21.8 percent, with John McCain at 15.2 percent and Ron Paul in fourth place at 7.4 percent.

The poll also shows that 40 percent of self-identified independents say they were still not sure if they would vote in the Democratic or Republican primary.

This is, as far as I can tell, the highest Paul has placed in any New Hampshire poll, thought it does seem to be inconsistent with other recent polls in the state.

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com

Economic Illogic

Dumbasses and Authoritarians, Economics

One economist seems to think that the recent fires in Southern California might actually help the economy:

“In the odd nature of economic accounting, this will probably be a stimulus,” said Alan Gin, a University of San Diego economist. “There will be a huge amount of rebuilding in the next couple of years, financed by insurance payments.”

Hey, let’s take this idea to it’s logical conclusion. Let’s burn down the entire state of California. Now that’ll be a real economic boom.

Right ?

Of course not.

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com

Giuliani’s Neocon Foreign Policy Advisors

Election '08, Foreign Affairs

The New York Times has a report out on the foreign policy team that Rudy Giuliani has assembled, and it seems to be made up of the same bunch of guys who got us in the mess we’re in right now:

Rudolph W. Giuliani’s approach to foreign policy shares with other Republican presidential candidates an aggressive posture toward terrorism, a commitment to strengthening the military and disdain for the United Nations.

But in developing his views, Mr. Giuliani is consulting with, among others, a particularly hawkish group of advisers and neoconservative thinkers

(…)

Mr. Giuliani’s team includes Norman Podhoretz, a prominent neoconservative who advocates bombing Iran “as soon as it is logistically possible”; Daniel Pipes, the director of the Middle East Forum, who has called for profiling Muslims at airports and scrutinizing American Muslims in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps; and Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has written in favor of revoking the United States’ ban on assassination.

(…)

One of Mr. Giuliani’s most important foreign policy tutors is Charles Hill, a career diplomat and former deputy to Secretary of State George P. Shultz in the Reagan administration. Mr. Hill had never met Mr. Giuliani when he was invited to a 45-minute meeting at Giuliani Partners in late February — a meeting that stretched to nearly three hours.

Mr. Hill went on to become the campaign’s chief foreign policy adviser, and to assemble a team that is united by its generally hawkish views and its belief in using American power to achieve its aims.

Just days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Hill joined a number of foreign policy experts in signing an open letter to Mr. Bush urging that “even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.”

I’ve made it clear on this site in the past that I’m not exactly in the “bring all the troops home” crowd when it comes to foreign policy. At the same time, though, I think it’s fairly clear that the neocon foreign policy that’s been in place since September 11th and its seeming devotion to eternal war and some grand dream of imposing democracy by fiat on a region of the world that has no experience with either liberty or democracy has failed spectacularly, with Exhibit A being Iraq. The surge may have quelled violence, but it’s done nothing to turn Iraq into anything resembling a stable democracy, and there’s no reason to believe that any amount of American military force is capable of accomplishing such a goal.

The fact that Giuliani is apparently taking advice from people who still believe in this fallacy should be an indication of what his foreign policy will be like.

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com

Supreme Court To Consider D.C. Gun Ban Appeal Request Nov. 9th

Constitution, District of Columbia v. Heller, Individual Rights, Keep and Bear Arms, Legal

SCOTUSBlog reports that the Supreme Court will consider the Writ Of Certiorari in the two cases appealing last year’s decision overturning Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban on November 9th:

The Supreme Court will consider two petitions growing out of the Second Amendment dispute over a District of Columbia ban on private possession of handguns at its Conference on Nov. 9, according to the Court’s electronic docket on Wednesday.

The two cases are the city’s appeal — District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290) — challenging a D.C. Circuit Court ruling last March striking down the handgun ban under the Second Amendment, and a cross-petition by five city residents — Parker v. District of Columbia (07-335) — seeking to join in the case to add their own legal complaints about the city gun control law.

Because the two sides have framed the Second Amendment question in different ways in their papers in 07-290, it is conceivable that, should the Court grant review, it might choose to rephrase the issue itself.

If the requests for appeal are granted in either case, the earliest argument would be heard is February or March, with a decision coming sometime before the Court’s term ends in June 2008.

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com
1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 28