Did you see the footage of him trying to give the female leader of Germany a shoulder massage?

not the GOV

but the 100's or thousands of professors and university scientist who would have benefited from this not to mention the next generation of the same

think of it like the SETI project except the brains in the chain are the workstations

but im done with this portion of this thread im only here to bash bush:thumbsup

Hey Rebekah! :)

It looked more like he was either trying to kill her, or molest her. God, I'm so embarrassed sometimes when I see him on TV.

But yeah.

Amusingly, since you bring it up:

"But, sadly, funding was cut to zero in September 1993, when the SETI radiotelescopes had been listening for less than one year. Since then it has run at a reduced level, under the auspices of Project Phoenix, Project Argus, and other privately funded searches."

Good things come in non-governmental packages.

Do you then agree that oil companies should have their billions in annual government research grants ended immediately? Cool.

I have no idea what it's like in the US, but I have been on the council of my department in a university with public funding, which was directly involved in managing the budget and grants. In my experience, it was nowhere near as bad as you make it sound. A one-year research grant only took a week or two of paperwork.

If research doesn't have a direct application, it still may have indirect applications. For example, the research done by Marie Curie had no known direct applications and was not done by a company in search of a profit, yet it led to rather important applications.

Sure, accidental discoveries while searching for specific applications can have huge, unforeseen effects, but to claim that this can replace fundamental research entirely is pure nonsense.

bush is an idiot period

You have now become to me a cypher wrapped in an engima.. smothered in secret sauce. :o

100%. I think that no one should be able to take money for elections. I think that the top two candidates, after primaries, should get $100 Million each.

This will save us BILLIONS in favors that don't have to be repaid to special interests. Republicans are DROWNING in oil money, and they REEK of paying it back with special favors, tax breaks, and incentives. It's disgusting. Democrats, unfortunately, are the same way with minority groups and the poor.

:helpme haha

where's woj?

hahaha... nice!!

Agreed, and that's why I was telling you what a nightmare it was. We found a way to change the quantum spin state of an electron, which has an amazing number of applications -- research grant not extended, because there was no "sexy" application for it. I wrote a rebuttal explaining that it was the key piece to time travel, teleportation, and instantaneous communication, and bam -- there's the money. It's a flawed system, for sure.

Although you just admitted you have "no idea what it's like in the US," it's interesting to know that the process is less onerous in your area. I'm glad to hear that.

Great point! I agree completely. I'll point out, though, that research for the sake of research doesn't mesh well in a free-market society. This plays better in Socialist- or Communist-trending economies like in China and Europe.

I believe SwordFish's response was aimed at the thread creator :winkwink:

Thanks! I used to go by the name of "enigma" in some places.

What makes my code so hard to crack for you?

Sweet hijack, eh? Next time, I'll wear a ski mask! :winkwink:

GWB is the best stand up comic ive seen

God, I only wish.

That'd be funny, though, if he stood up in 2008 and said, "Ha ha, y'all! The joke's been on you! President Rove has had his hand up my ass like a puppet this whole time! Now fuck 'ya, I'm going to the ranch!"

It may be mean, but in my experience, most who claim to be dems (and post on internet forums) are illiterate, prone to flying off the handle whenever they disagree with anything, save actually being slighted.. and refuse to state anything but their view when told that they've got their facts wrong, or are entirely full of shit.

The 'pubs, however, tend to be on the, shall I say 'insane' side? Either so militaristic that they seem to find it an excuse to blow holes in their wall with guns sticking from every oriface, or, well, just old money assholes.

You're not only eloquent, but I agree with you. You're actually taking an objective view.. on GFY.. where I just insulted someone's dumbass thread with a directly retarded counterpoint.

Hence, you are an enigma. I shall watch you with awe. ;)

I'm with you, 12clicks.... maybe for slightly different reasons, but I'm with you. And it's not even a Bush-bash... I just don't understand why, after all that's happened in our country and around the world during his administration, he finds funding of scientific research so objectionable that he's using his first veto to stop it. But, I guess it goes with the standard theme... Bush prefers faith over science, and I think that's irresponsible... more at this point in history than any other.

The truth sometimes hurts. Most of the Democrats on here are downright scary. As I said, it embarrasses me to share a party with people who have the SOLE objective of bashing a sitting President. Get a point that hasn't been fed to you by CNN, and I'll listen. (Not you, of course, I'm speaking out loud to deaf ears.)

Hence why I could never identify with the Republican party -- I think it's easier to be a well-spoken Democrat who isn't a Bush-basher (but *is* willing to point out when Bush is wrong) than it is to be a well-spoken Republican who can put away the "rootin' tootin' shootin'" for a bit and have a decent conversation.

That's kind of you to say, and I appreciate it. I try to have conversations of value, but what I usually end up with is people calling me "clueless" or making comments about various female relatives. I guess it sheds light on their character, debate skills, and relative worth.

Well, now you've cracked the code. I'm afraid there aren't very many layers to my "onion" -- what you see on the surface is pretty much me.

WTF are you talking about? I wasn't talking to you...

The part about it that disturbs me the most is this: if he *is* just pulling the party line ... why? He can't run for re-election, he's already served two terms. What political capital does he need now? He's got two years left, most of his contemporaries will see him as a lame duck in his second term already, and there's nothing he could possibly do to please his opposition in Congress. If he walked down from Heaven and began the Second Coming, I'm convinced the Bush-bashers would spit in his face on the way to Hell.

So what's the benefit in pandering? Is it to preserve the Republican base vote for the next candidate?

It can only mean one thing: He cares because it's going to be Jeb Bush running for the job.

Is there any other way to look at it?

I never claim an allegiance to either party. Just try to use common sense.
It makes no sense for example to not fund some things while other worthwhile things are not funded. Realistically, there will be no end to government funding, so thats the system we have to work within.
Oil gets billions, and wind power gets $100k here, $200k there, $0 there.. it's ridiculous. And it's 100% renewable obviously.
So why should "we" fund idiotic things that will never have any bearing on our actual lives while things like stem-cells are subject to election-time baloney? And yes thats what it's about, and some of us called it right here on GFY months ago.

Scroll up, read, calm down, and pull up a chair -- the world is passing you by.

Hmmm. Take away the specific references and you could be describing the behavior of a great many people.

About 60% of those entitled to vote in November 2004 actually did so, thus less than one-third of the voters put Bush in office. Should you blame them, some of whom at least are neither religious (at least not in the sense meant here) or sheep, or should you blame the larger number who didn't even pretend to take an interest in who governs the country?

How many of those who did vote are, as you said about Bush "pretty much clueless on everything thats going on around"? I suspect this board is a lot more typical of today's society than most people might like to admit, and it is apparent from the threads like those about Lebanon, that hardly anyone has even taken in such information as appears on TV, let alone knows more than that.

Come to that, how did we ever become so complacent about the gravy train that the whole political system has become? Perhaps because these days so many people associate ethical standards with naivete and save their admiration for displays of greed: again, look around this board. Do the same for examples of behavior far worse than anything GW is guilty of.

Clichés such as that which says people get the government they deserve, may be overused, but that doesn't mean they don't remain true.

Wow. All I gotta say.

In my opinion, government funding for "research for the sake of research" can work out extremely well, as long as the government doesn't try to get involved with the research itself.

Ideally, universities or funds would get funding based on past (but recent) performance (judged by discoveries or publications, not by applications), but would have complete freedom with regards to how they use that funding. That way, incompetent bureaucrats would be cut out of the process, while fundamental research could still take place.

Research for the sake of research and government-funded research are necessary for the growth of knowledge, though. Without these things, private companies would lack a foundation to build on.

Unfortunately, because we live in the reality of a two-party system, your only "real" voice is in a political party's primary. For example, I am a registered Democrat, so in Connecticut, I have a choice between Ned Lamont or Joe Lieberman. A Republican isn't going to beat either one of them, so the "real" election is in the primary. Depending on your state, you can't participate in the primary without registering with a party. But, I respect your independence.

The problem is that wind power isn't able to supply a reasonable amound of energy without consuming enormous swaths of land. It isn't, unfortunately, a viable alternative to fossil fuels. But your underlying point, that oil is over-funded and alternatives is under-funded, is a valid one. President Bush introduced an alternative energy funding plan a couple of weeks ago, and this is a great step in the right direction. The issue is with Congress, unfortunately. As a candidate seeks election, they take on contributions from special interest groups. These groups then call in "favors" later on that result in the bilking of taxpayers. Eliminate the special interest contributions, and you eliminate a lot of waste.

What the government doesn't want you to know is that it is PERFECTLY capable of running on business taxes alone. Personal income tax for middle-income and below families is 100% unnecessary. The only reason it exists at all is to fund the programs that pay back special interests or minority groups (think welfare and immigrant programs).

We shouldn't. And it *is* election-time baloney. But the problem is -- Bush can't be re-elected. The only reason I can imagine for pandering on this issue would be to pave the way for Jeb, who will need the religious vote.

Yeah. I can understand that. I was a registered dem at one point. It just seemed 'the right way' - but the longer time went, the more skewed things became, and, well.. we all have our opinions.

Honestly, I'm a 'pub and I say that Bush is a dipshit. He lacks the charisma that Clinton had, the eloquence that any prior have had, and has the social graces of a bull in a China shop.

However, he's not smart enough to have a personal agenda for more than five minutes at a time.. like Ronnie in his later years.. and man, 80s chicks were hot. I'm hoping we get some of that action!

Sure, nice way of trying to cover up your stupidity, idiot. Next time, slow down during your frantic replies and realize that everyone in a thread isn't talking to you. In fact, few people probably are because you are a pissant. Next.

The problem is that the individual in question represents the U.S. as a whole. When we travel and people in other countries speak very slowly like we're retarded -- he's the reason.

What do you expect, though? It's a "me too" club of people who need the approval of others, in text form, on the Internet of all places. Your point is accurate to the point of painfulness.

I think it was when TV hit the market. The more distracted the cattle, the less likely they are to notice corruption. And even if they DO notice, they won't do anything about it -- they have to watch American Idol, so there's no time to be proactive. Might as well just bitch on a message board. Because THAT'S effective.

If you'd taken the time to READ my replies, you wouldn't have even posted this. Notice, in three sentences, you said: "stupidity, idiot, frantic, pissant." Quite a friendly fellow. I'm sure society is proud of what it has produced.

My dad is ultra christian and a Bush fan and he said nearly the same thing to me last night. Bad call.

I wouldn't be in too much of a rush to buy into that differentiation. Capitalism, socialism, communism and all the other isms are all collectivist systems at root. Capitalism sits better with most of us, because it allows us to retain more illusions, but even the core principle of private ownership is largely that, an illusion. The unvarying common factor is that people are treated primarily as economic units who exist to serve an elite.

Sure, keep coming off half-cocked by replying rudely to people who aren't even talking to you. It is amusing. You really aren't very good at this whole message board thing. Click.

In pre-capitalism times this was absolutely necessary, as it is still in many countries who haven't truly reached that form of goverment. Without it, we wouldn't have had the Industrial Revolution, much less the Renaissance. Leading up to this time, Kings made patrons out of artists and scientists. Of course, there wasn't much economic incentive to innovate back then.

Look at what government programs in non-capitalist countries have produced: we're typing on the results right now, as a matter of fact. Without CERN, would we have an Internet?

Good points all through your post, although I didn't quote the majority of it.

If you still aren't talking to me, I'll assume you're talking strictly to yourself, and ignore you, I suppose.

thanks to his brother the smarter bush ( jeb ) will never have a chance in hell at being president

wait until I announce my marriage to mojo