We have another debate coming up shortly, so here's an open thread for you all to chatter on…if the software lets you.
There will be no drinking games allowed that encourage alcohol consumption every time POW is mentioned.
<sigh> If ever I hear the words "my friends" again, I shall gag.
Defining moment for me was when McCain insisted that Obama was dangerous because he would speak too loudly (while later castigating him for advocating diplomacy), and Obama came back to point out that McCain was the one singing "bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran". In other words, McCain was a desperate fraud while Obama was calm and well-spoken.
Although I also felt Obama was thin on specifics and rich in politician-speak. He didn't thrill me, but he was solidly better than his opponent.
Oh, yeah…and when McCain called Obama "that one". That was condescending and creepy.
- Log in to post comments
Can we have drinking games that encourage alcohol consumption any time one of them obviously is lying his ass off?
Ahhh! PZ you're too strict.
For sheer craziness, check out the Conservapedia article on Obama. Scary. I'm sure the entry on Palin is on the same par, but I can't bear to spend more than a few minutes on that site.
There will be no drinking games allowed that encourage alcohol consumption every time POW is mentioned.
Alcohol poisoning is nothing to laugh at.
McCain/Palin, OTOH.
Maybe Mccain will call Obama a terrorist, a traitor, and threaten to kill him like several of his fascist supporters did during various Mccain events.
Let the clown show begin...
I am hoping that McCain - who's been looking rather shaky this week - loses it during the debate.
And I'm baking FSM wafers*, which we will desecrate during the festivities, with applications of marinara sauce and a nice red plonk.
Read "mini pizzas"
Maybe Mccain will call Obama a terrorist, a traitor, and threaten to kill him like several of his fascist supporters did during various Mccain events.
Speaking of POW:
I've always been the guy with the finger in his nose
When the passport picture gets taken
When the big guys took me out stealing chickens
It was me caught holding the bacon
When they're dropping a piano from the forty seventh floor
I'm the guy underneath a looking up
And when the tidal wave strikes a hundred miles at sea
I'm always at the rail throwing up
Whee, KER-Pow!
Somehow I woulda met you anyhow
You fix it up and then holy cow
You folks should oughta see me now....
I was standing in the artsy-fartsy uptown restaurant a few frozen dinners ago
When I stumbled on a waiter full of crepe suzettes
And I ran out the door flambeaux
Then I ran down to Chinatown got myself some soy sauce
And grabbed some moo goo gai-pan to go
When I got wiped out by a stray bean sprout that was landin' on the floor
Whee, KER-Pow!
Somehow I woulda met you anyhow
You fix it up and then holy cow
You folks should oughta see me now....
Well I finally got so fed up
I was off to blow my head off
With the gun inside the cash box at the store
Then I thought I'd grab a fistful
Just in case I weren't successful
But instead I got my tie caught in the drawer
When you're riding down the road at a hundred miles an hour
And the guy ahead is hitching someplace
Honey don't you be surprised I'll be wiping out my eyes
If you pass me leaving dust in my face
Whee, KER-Pow!
Somehow I woulda met you anyhow
You fix it up and then holy cow
You folks should oughta see me now....
Whee, KER-Pow!
Somehow I woulda met you anyhow
You fix it up and then holy cow
You folks should oughta see me now....
-- The Loving Spoonful
As with the last debate, this thread will be my gateway on content. I await Scott from Oregon to turn up and call them both liars and talk about how neither candidate is following HIS ideas on how to save the economy.
Maybe Mccain will call Obama a terrorist, a traitor, and threaten to kill him like several of his fascist supporters did during various Mccain events.
Scott from Oregon '08
Maybe Mccain will call Obama a terrorist, a traitor, and threaten to kill him like several of his fascist supporters did during various Mccain events.
Oh, get on stage already, you lazy Senators. I'm already up past my bedtime.
Have popcorn and my political debate bingo cards here with the hotwords on them.
I'll bet Obama says "No, Senator, I DO understand the situation ...."
If I win I want a set of Pharyngula eucharist shaped beer coasters.
Have popcorn and my political debate bingo cards here with the hotwords on them.
I'll bet Obama says "No, Senator, I DO understand ...."
If I win I want a set of Pharyngula eucharist shaped beer coasters.
Have popcorn and my political debate bingo cards here with the hotwords on them.
I'll bet Obama says "No, Senator, I DO understand ...."
If I win I want a set of Pharyngula eucharist shaped beer coasters.
The drinking game should be based on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and/or bailout? It's 2008. You decide. I'm just sorry I missed you all on the VP debate.
Damn .. sorry to appear so enthusiastic. /embarrassed
Wow, comments in triplicate...
Yes, the audience has agreed to be polite, but have the Senators?
oooh. Grandpa looks stiff.
What's up with McCain, he seems a little stiff?
Yes, the audience has agreed to be polite, but have the Senators?
I hope not! (I'm worried a pharyngula live-comment of this might be enough to do scienceblogs in its weakened state)
The Eucharist shaped coasters are fine. My parents were Orthodox Catholic. My dad STILL won't eat meat on Friday. Why do I make sure I don't live in the same state that he does?
"oooh. Grandpa looks stiff."
That's the Viagra kicking in.
McCain: "Let's not raise taxes on anyone" in one breath, then talks about our multi-trillion dollar debt in the other. I don't like paying taxes either, but how are we to pay down this debt?
I wince every time McCain says "my friends", the same way I do whenever I hear a newsreader say "folks".
So, McCain is against letting the government get involved in healthcare, but he's okay with the gov becoming our real estate agent and banker?
"Not you, Tom." Ooh. Was that a joke?
Meg Whitman???
A company laying on 1600 people. Sweet...
"My FREINDs"
Drink
I punched out for this, I better see some blood.
Stiff.. arthritis. Let's see how the dexedrine lasts.
After the greeting and wave, McCain sat down and began to write, or doodle. This disconnected him from the audience. Well, me, at least.
I hope Scott from Oregon doesn't show up! I'm sick of his rant.
Hey Danio, maybe we could do a public service act, find out where Scott lives and duct tape his hands over his mouth. No more talking or typing!
McCain is trying to "connect" with the audience. He's getting very close to the people who ask the questions. I may be wrong, but I think that would creep me out a bit, were I there.
I want to see this thing turn into a knife fight.
Tom would be better qualified than anybody in Bush's Administration!
And ebay laid off 10,000 (?) today?!
Stiff.. arthritis. Let's see how the dexedrine lasts.
Obama: "I've got to correct a little bit of Senator McCain's history, not surprisingly."
Did McCain just refer to "Alan"? Who the hell is Alan?
McCain is moving in a stilted manner, almost like he has recently suffered from a stroke and is partially paralyzed.
Stiff.. arthritis.
I'm drinking every time the CNN "Uncommitted Ohio Voters" meters diverge & intersect (so that means two drinks each time).
Ouch. "You're not interested in hearing politicians pointing fingers." That seemed (to me) to be a response by Obama to some glazed eyes in the audience.
Obama needs to do a quick defense of any accusations then go on why he should lead, this turning to mostly attacks on McCain cheapens his message IMO
No-one wants Scott from Oregon to show up. Not even Scott from Oregon would want Scott from Oregon to show up. But he needs to voice his opinion here because he can't voice it anywhere that matters.
I'm glad that Obama brought up the fact that the Republicans shelved without bringing to a vote the Freddie/Fannie bill that McCain keeps bragging about
Americans are the best importers? so we're the best at importing goods? great!
BTW, Brokaw's voice crackles as if he's nervous and has never been on a stage such as this.
AAARGH! I can't stand listening to McCain bragging about how he "stood up to his own party." If he really can't stand what the Republicans do and have done, why is he still in the party? Why pretend to distance yourself from the party you support???
Where does the meter stuff come from? Breathalyzers?
Antiscience!
Damn those planetariums!
Yeah fuck the planetariums. Who needs that education sciency mumbo jumbo.
I see the sun that's all that matters.
McReacharound has been fighting corruption by tracking himself down. And that's why we need to drill.
"My Friends"
DRINK
Planetarium...BAAAAAD!!!!
Holy hell... Obama: McCain will tell you X, which is false for this reason.
60 seconds later, McCain: X! X!!
McCain looks really angry...and now he's bashing spending money on planetarium projectors. Cuz educating people about science isn't worth spending money on, apparently...
Racism is unspeakable, sexism is inappropriate, but ageism is acceptable?
They are both talking nonsense about bailing out all of the profligates who have no savings and believe strongly in "market value." This country is going straight to hell.
I wonder if we will hear about Bear DNA again this evening?
Damn those planetariums!
Replace Mccain's criticism of planetarium with the word "library", and see how that sounds.
Americans are the best importers? so we're the best at importing goods? great!
Teresa Finch (questioner) - "How can we trust either of you with our money when both parties got us into this global economic crisis?"
She must be an undecided leaning towards McCain since she seems to not be able to read.
After both candidates reminded me that Warren Buffet would be a much better president than both Obama and McCain, I got bored and turned off the TV.
It won't be a close election. Obama will easily win in Florida and Ohio, and McCain can't win without those two states.
Off topic: the stock market has been crashing lately and there's some excellent buying opportunities now. For example Google is only $346 a share, down from its $747 high.
Good god - McCain can't remember three items for a few minute? He has to stop and write down "Healthcare, Entitlement Reform, Energy"
Damn, they should've invested in a simple piece of electronics that can either produce light or sound every 60 seconds. Brokaw has reminded them 3 or 4 times now.
So much for Brokaw's 1 min. response / rebuttal time. Of course either candidate would be crazy to follow that of their own volition.
instead of drinking to 'POW', i'll just drink to 'maverick.'
McCain gets the first question from the Internet.
Am I wrong to be amused by that?
Planetarium projector
DRINK
Eliminate agencies of the government that aren't working? Damn! There goes the Executive, the Judiciary, the Legislative...
OMIGOD, Elmer Fudd as the mediator, sucking flag.
My Friends
My Friends
DRINK
DRINK
If Stiffy says one more time "I know how to fix X" or "I have taken on Y" Im going to throw something.
All empty phrases from McCain,nothing of substance,I hope someone out there will notice.
is mccain going to get rid of abstinence only sex ed?
Good question, "What sacrifices will you ask the American people to make?"
BTW - apparently "earmarks" is the word of the day. Where's Groucho when you need him?
notice how every earmark mccain hates is a science earmark
McCain: Spending on defense needs to be cut, but in the meantime we need a spending freeze on everything but defense...
yeah, that makes lots of sense
McCain eliminate military aviation contracts in AZ? PuhLeeze.
mav·er·ick (māv'ər-ĭk, māv'rĭk) n.
An unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.
Drinking games be damned. I started drinking BEFORE the debate just so I could stand listening to it.
So far, McCain has been speaking and acting "folksy", "daddy": as if he's in the living room of a family that just can't understand complex issues but that just wants to be reassured that they don't have to worry 'bout a thing: he, McCain will take care of everything for them.
Obama has been speaking to people as if they can understand the current major problems, and he is presenting them with the most rational ways with which those problems can be dealt.
When the consensus is tabulated, we'll see if the majority of the US voters are mentally little kids or adults.
Cynically, I expect that the former is true.
Ideallistically, oh! how I wish it will be the latter.
Wait? We have to make sacrifices for our country? I thought shopping fixed everything!
No, grandpa, don't talk about jello... you're trying to avoid the unflattering topics.
uuugh
This is depressing
I'm going to need to get a good chortling tonight.
My Friends
DRINK
"Nailing jello to a wall." How very quaint.
Overhead projector for a planetarium that costs $3 million?
"Earmarks" - DRINK!
"My Friends" - DRINK!
Did he really just say, "Nailing jello to the wall?" Ooooooh he's so folksy.
McCain needs to be careful about what he attributes to Obama, it is clear that Obama is correcting him on all of his misleading statements.
So, CNN has the little dial thingies where undecideds rate how much they like what they're hearing from the candidate speaking. McCain is getting positives, but a lot of flat-lining too. Obama, however, is frigging pegging that thing at some point on nearly every topic so far. Looks like bad news for McCranky.
Those Tennesseans sitting behind Sen. Obama are really distracting! What is that woman smiling about? They are posing.
McCain: We can address health care and energy at the same time.
What Obama could have said: I am glad that my opponent now realizes the importance of simultaneously addressing important issues, when just last week he declared he could not simultaneously address our economic circumstances and the matter of his own campaign.
What Obama said: 9/11!
I don't understand how McCain's insurance proposal works. He wants to tax insurance premiums, then give us a tax credit for those premiums. Doesn't one cancel out the other?
Right - A freeze on all spending EXCEPT defense. McCain still has a hardon for war - not so much for health care or education.
hahaha! I think that definition fits a hell of a lot better than the one McCain is trying to pass off to America.
the cnn uncommitted voter lines are strangely mesmeric....like a lava lamp, a lava lamp that hates McCain being a tool.
PZ, you or Phil gotta track down that overhead projector that's responsible for America's ruin.
I am having to cook dinner while the debate is on. I cannot hear the words so much as tone.
How can a person sound whinny and condescending at the same time.
Pastas burning! Gotta go.
McCain having another go at Brokaw LOL
How does he fix Medicare?
Yay !! A commission !!!
My Friends
Awwww, Barry got shot down by Brokaw! :(
McCain: "**I'll** answer the question, Tom." Snort, snort, chortle chortle
Ouch.. McCain! "Base Closing Commission"! He's trying to lose the military now. I know the AF base closings were a big deal here, even though Hill AFB was passed over.
Yes, McCain has been acting like "dad". A folksy pastor. "It's not that hard to fix Social Security"? WTF? "Our wonderful Ronald Regan."? WTF?
the cnn uncommitted voter lines are strangely mesmeric....like a lava lamp, a lava lamp that hates McCain being a tool.
Maybe Palin is right. Humans and dinosaurs together, right now, on TV! Oh, nevermind, that was just McCain.
Aghhh! McCain: The best way to help the environment is with nuclear power.
And put the waste on an active fault zone in Nevada? I think not.
He's degeneratin into Palinesque sentence fragments.
Nuclear Power: biggest taxpayer supported boondoggle in history
I can't drink no more my friends I'm getting dizzy.
I have been on Navy Ships,I know nuclear energy is safe !
*headdedk*
My Friends
@Kevpod (#95),
It was for the Adler Planetarium in Chicago.
Oh, no: Obama has gone Palin. He just said "drillin'".
D'oh, Barack.. "I'm just trying to keep up with John!" It doesn't help to sound like a 5-yr old. "He started it"
"That one!" WTF
What was his plan for SS and medicare? Commissions??
McCain started out deathly white. He's getting redder and redder as the debate continues. What happens if he has a stroke right on stage? Yikes!
I don't know if i missed it before or in the comments above. But what overhead projector was McCain referring to twice at the start of the debate?
Aargh! Stop with the my friends already!!
Now it's multiple times in one answer.
A friend of mine was a nuke engineer on a submarine.
He said : Nukes are safe on ships and subs, they are surrounded by water, anybody who would put on land is a fucking idiot.
Planetarium projector
taken from:
http://obama.senate.gov/press/070621-obama_announces_3/
- - - - - - - - -
Adler Planetarium, to support replacement of its projector and related equipment, $3,000,000
One of its most popular attractions and teaching tools at the Adler Planetarium is the Sky Theater. The projection equipment in this theater is 40 years old, and is no longer supported with parts or service by the manufacturer. It has begun to fail, leaving the theater dark and groups of school students and other interested museum-goers without this very valuable and exciting learning experience.
My friends...
*BZZT*
My friends...
*BZZT*
Whoops, someone better hit the reset switch. Man, I thought Bush 3.0 was supposed to have all those bugs fixed. Back to the drawing board.
@ tai haku (#94),
And those lines are causing me to run out of alcohol.
-----
BTW, per Brokaw, they _do_ have lights for the 1 minute warning; a loud sound at 1 minute wouldn't have hurt, though.
What the hell is McCain doing? He just walked into the shot behind Obama, grimaced at someone off-camera, then made a "huh?" gesture. Weird.
I thought McSame couldn't use his left arm? Why is he waving it all over the place? and he's pacing around with the mike...
gotta go and help my aging mother to bed.
and then
DRINK!
If that line thingy on CNN can be trusted,Obama is hitting it out of the park on every single issue.
My Friends
The straight talk express didn't lose a wheel; it's just driving 20 miles below the speed limit in the passing lane... with the blinker on.
I don't know if i missed it before or in the comments above. But what overhead projector was McCain referring to twice at the start of the debate?
As someone who is in low "middle class" who actually has health care insurance through my employer at $219 for single for my monthly premium (flat fee of 45$ per brand prescription/20$ per generic prescription, 20%/80% coverage, plus 30$ per visit co-pay and $3000 per year major medical deductible). Then my employer throws in another $579 per month for this health insurance as a benefit. So my insurance premium alone is 9576$ per year. Under McCain's plan, I would lose 4576$ per year in benefits.
What the fuck?!
The straight talk express didn't lose a wheel; it's just driving 20 miles below the speed limit in the passing lane... with the blinker on.
This really would work better in a chat room with the transcript posted later :)
McCain is bashing man-dates! Another example of gay bashing by the Republican Party! (I crack me up.)
BTW - he sure is a whiney bastard
McCain just said some shitty joke about him needing hair transplants. Completely proper for a presidential debate.
$5000 covers perhaps a day or two of hospital stay, with only cheap tests. Absolutely worthless for someone without insurance, should they have something serious come up.
As a healthy individual, I'll enjoy the $5000 "refund", but I'd feel a little guilty about it.. I don't pay that much in taxes.
Nuclear energy is safe! Just ship the waste off to space. Don't mention Chernobyl, it offends me.
My Friends - Drink!
Thank you Brad.
Anyone wanna tell me what McCain means by "Obama will fine mothers struggling to get health care for their children"? Also, in what country is $5000 enough money for complete health care for a family. A lot of deductibles for health insurance are almost $5000, that's not including the premium and copays. That's probably the most asinine plan ever.
Did I hear the drums? Or is that the one-minute time marker?
Why does McCain sound so damn patronizing? Between his demeanor and Sarah Palin's chirpily talking as if to a group of pre-schoolers the other day, I don't know which is worse...
Ahh! My head will explode!
Er, buzzed off the cuff. I pay a fair amount more than that ;) Still I'd feel wrong about it when other people are basically left to dry.
"Greatest force for good in the history of the world"
I need to go and puke now.
McCain has started doing that creepy reptile tongue movement. I wonder what that means?
Nana FCD wonders, "I thought McSame couldn't use his left arm? "
He can use it. He just can't use like you or I can use ours. Non issue anyway.
McCain: We've gone to the 4 corners of the world and shed American blood, because we are peacekeepers, and peacemakers!
Oh, of course.
Given that one of these two is going to win, we, the peasants, have already lost. Honestly, if all of Congress had just phoned it in for the past few years, we'd all be better off than we are after what they've done.
LOL McCain says we need someone in office that knows when we should engage in military conflicts AND THEN suggested he be that person.
Wow. My prescriptions alone are $5000 a month.
IRAQ Hole
'bout time, talk about the elephant in the living room
Because, my fellow Americans, we as a nation have learned the consequences.
You don't just "strongly consider" intervening to stop genocide. If you're able to, fucking do it.
I've already gone through 3 beers due to McCain's my friends. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
Is it just me, an uncommitted (yeah right) Brit, but is the shaky old man absolutely getting his ass kicked by the charismatic one? Are we seeing the next president unfurl in front of our eyes?
What the fuck?I'm so glad I live in a country with universal healthcare.
Alls you needs is "a cool hand at the tiller".
"Reagan, My Hero" Did I just switch to a Lifetime Movie
It appears that McCain memorized a few "special" phrases. He keeps repeating the same things over and over..."Fundamental differences," "My friends," "He doesn't understand"
VICTORY WITH HONOR !!
He one upped Nixon's 'Peace with Honor', which worked out great.
Good to know Crash McPlane's 'hero' was a WWII draft-doger.
oooh! low, whispery, dramatic vocalization! (goin' fur the gut)
vs
clear presentation of the issues (going for the brain)
(last "my friends" reiteration: resulted in literal involuntary regurgitation) Anyone keeping track of the number of times that this lying phrase has been uttered?
Scooter said:
"A friend of mine was a nuke engineer on a submarine.
He said : Nukes are safe on ships and subs, they are surrounded by water, anybody who would put on land is a fucking idiot."
I lived aboard CVN-69 for 3 years, - knew guys in reactor and engineering. They said the same thing.
The real thing about the nuclear industry is that the contaminated equipment and much of the core material cannot be reprocessed - it is dangerous for a minimum of several thousand years.
Despite what McCain claims, Europe and Japan gave up on new nuclear facilities due to the danger. Yes, they still have operational plants, but they are phasing them out.
By the way, I did vote for McCain when he ran for Senator. He's changed a LOT in the last 3 years.
Someone tell McCain that the reputation of the US does *NOT* need exacerbating...
That said, he answered that reasonably well afterward. This is the first point that I've liked McCain's stance on better than Obama's.
I want McPain to stop saying "my friend".
This grumpy, angry old old man is NOT my friend.
"We can't allow another Holocaust, and we can't allow another Rwanda..." but no mention of intervening in Darfur? That's cold.
McCain is a senile inflexible zombie,an empty shell.That has become increasingly clear to me in the last hour.
I'm such a geek. I really like it that Obama pronounces "Pakistan" correctly.
"Cool hand at the tiller"
Did McCain just endorse Obama???
Crash has a lot of heroes, I guess he learned about slaughtering civilians en masse from Teddy.
Who next, Kissinger?
I've already gone through 3 beers due to McCain's my friends. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
Oh, you're supposed to do it with beer? No wonder I'm getting a bit sauced.
McCain: Teddy Roosevelt is now his hero? What happened to Ron Reagan?
I want McPain to stop saying "my friend".
This grumpy, angry old old man is NOT my friend.
Can the object of "my hero" be two different people?
McCain: "My hero is Teddy Roosevelt."
So the "my hero, Ronald Reagan" comment from 2 minutes ago was either a joke or a lie, I guess.
I can't take this any more! McCain is a fucktard (and Palin is a Post Toad). The stupid, it hurts!
I see the debate format is being destroyed. Cool.
I want McPain to stop saying "my friend".
This grumpy, angry old old man is NOT my friend.
Obama: "kill bin Laden". Not bring him in front of a war crimes tribunal?
McCain claims to know how to get bin Laden, and, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that sort of a very important thing to do?
As a decent American, don't you think he'd share that with the rest of the fucking class instead of blackmailing us all?
Gadzooks, man! I hate this freakin' doddering old moron.
The American People want blood!
I can't post what I feel about McCain, listening to his dementia tonight, without risking a visit from the guys in sunglasses who talk into their sleeves. If Mc becomes prez, I'm slitting my wrists.
Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
Senile McCain-> Gurgle, snort, drool, I was only joking! Really! Um - ahh, gee whiz, I dunno.
Fucking wow... He broke out the old KGB line.
Oh, well, if we just give "moral support" to Georgia and the Ukraine, that'll fix everything!
I wasn't shooting my mouth off like a crazed blowhard, I was speaking softly, and carrying a big stick, and joking, and staying the course...
with honor
like my illustrious military career getting drunk, whoring, and crashing planes.
I won't tell you what I'm going to do
vote for MEEEEEE
McCain keeps repeating that the Surge is working and that Obama was wrong,although he has been corrected multiple times.
What a dirty liar.
The "kill bin Laden" bit was a worry.
Oh,here we go,I looked into Putin's eyes !
The adjudicator is an ass. Who is this guy?
Obama: "kill bin Laden". Not bring him in front of a war crimes tribunal?
Not possible. OBL has aides directed to kill him if capture appears imminent. Best case: we find him and kill him (or his own people kill him). Worst case, we bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, and forget about him again.
Me too. I think it's a good sign of respect for the people of Pakistan, and it's a sign of a diplomat I think.
Bush could never pull off that sort of simple thing, and I think that also lead to the sinking opinion people have for America.
Are we playing the "My Friends" drinking game???
I'm wasted!!!!
Not looking for a new Cold War with Russia? Didn't McCain just sat that he'll do it over Georgia? A place that the U.S. has no strategic in interest in? Just a "humanitarian interest" in?
My brain is starting to go numb, and I'm not even drinking...maybe it's time to start.
Interesting thing when I looked at CNN.com's audience reactions. It was going steadily down and leveling when McCain was speaking, then when Obama started speaking it went up, but the fascinating part is that the first group's line to start heading up was Republicans.
McCain: "I know how to get Bin Laden" "I will get Bin Laden" etc ad nauseum: so why could he not influence the head of his own party, prez Bush, to do so over 8 years? Inference: McCain is not an effective leader.
Similarly: McCain claims that he could look into Putin's eyes and see that he was not to be trusted, yet he couldn't sway the leader of his party from the conviction that Putin was a good guy based on Bush's interpretation of Putin's facial expressions? Again, not much of a leader or else the party is not an effective one.
Israel... Gotta protect the bible prophecies :P
Hey, I thought they weren't allowed to touch the people in the peanut gallery!
The adjudicator is Tom Brokaw of NBC news. I think he's doing a decent job, considering the candidates are ignoring the format they agreed on for the debate.
So Reagan is McCain's hero then? Too bad the Reagans never really forgave McCain for leaving his wife for Cindy.
McCain just said "preconditions"! Drink twice!!
#184: Yep, drink. It's makes listening to this ..very slightly easier.
Bush is doing well if he doesn't call them "Pakis" in public.
McCain: Harping again on preconditions for diplomacy? Don't you people learn? I'm pretty sure America is largely for diplomacy these days.
Matthew@#170: "Obama: 'kill bin Laden'. Not bring him in front of a war crimes tribunal?"
This is America, man. We either outright kill you -- or give you a book deal. "If I had blown up the towers..."
I still don't understand what the big deal is about talking to someone without pre-conditions. Isn't that the point of the talk - to set conditions and come to an agreement? Look at where Bush and company have put us, with their insistence on meeting conditions before they would meet with other world leaders.
Didn't expect the holocaust reference
McCain loves appeals to emotion. i haven't heard anything of substance from him.
#137
McCain has started doing that creepy reptile tongue movement. I wonder what that means?
It can only mean one thing.
Question: Is Russia Evil?
McCain: If I say Yes, that would be reigniting the Cold War, if I say no, I'd be ignoring their behavior.
WTF?!
Does McCain really think this is th place for a stump speech? Nearly everything he said is the same as the last "debate" (and was well-refuted that time)... Ahhh Last Question (Yay!)
"What don't you know, and how would you learn it?" This person must be a staffing professional somewhere. This is a pretty standard job interview question.
Didn't expect the holocaust reference
To McCain:
I'M...NOT...YOUR...FWEIND...BUDDAY!
Im tempted to call it a slaughter.
Curious how the media will spin it.
My Friends.
Every time McCain got off his stool and approached the cameras, he did that old man shuffle. It sure makew\s him look old.
Well we have the first gaffe of the evening, McCain's not wearing any pants.
Sorry, McCain does not get to say "our generation" these days.
(apologies if I double post, got some database error)
McCains closing is making me want to vomit.
HE'S...NOT...YOUR...BUDDAY...GUY!
Every time McCain got off his stool and approached the cameras, he did that old man shuffle. It sure makes him look old.
"We don't know where those countries are."
Comedy Gold
That was *awful*. By that, I mean bad.
I thought Brokaw did a reasonably good job--much better than the muddle-minded, tongue-tied moderator of the VP debate.
The pundits on PBS agree that there were no surprises and no risks. They both thought that McCain would be more agressive in this debate. They thought that Obama won by a slight edge, mostly on style and demeanor.
I'M.............NOT...........YOUR.......GUY.......FWEIND!
PBS just went to two former speech writers. Not surprisingly, the former Reagan speech writer thought that McCain was incredible - wonderful - etc, etc, etc. and the former Clinton speech writer thought the same of Obama. Not especially objective...
The moderator wasn't terrible - it was good how he let the rules flex a little - the actual debate though was not good. I know it's set up so there's not so much of a discussion, more of a stating of opinions.. but the ultimate result was little better than reading both candidates websites at the same time.
@ hubris hurts (#137) & Shaden Freud (#198),
Re: McCain's reptile tongue
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/tongue-jut.html
http://blog.indecision2008.com/2008/09/30/the-colbert-report-john-mccai…
The moderator wasn't terrible - it was good how he let the rules flex a little - the actual debate though was not good. I know it's set up so there's not so much of a discussion, more of a stating of opinions.. but the ultimate result was little better than reading both candidates websites at the same time.
This is fun...I'm watching Fox News try to find anything good to say about McCain's performance in the debate. Best they've found is that about half of their focus group (by show of hands) thought McCain did a better job on the economy (due to his statements about less government spending).
Best question of the evening ... from Fiorra (sp?) on what WE should sacrifice or are willing to give to make our country a better place. Best answer? Neither.
bonez_brigade #218 Thanks! The tongue-jut link is interesting. I'll have to look into this more.
My friends, I think Obama won this one. He held his own and his style of for this type of debate was very natural. He parried McCains attacks and he didn't make crappy jokes. Obama did great. I think the first was a tie, but this one was Obama's hands down, my friends.
Man, I can't believe I wasted ten minutes of my life reading the inane comments of this thread.
Eric Atkinson #224.
To quote the great Crow from MST3K...."Bite me, it's fun!"
Not the best format for getting to the core of the issues, but, nevertheless, Obama came out modestly ahead, perhaps 53/47. Things were pretty much tied for the first third of the debate, I thought. But Obama seemed to pull ahead after that and I don't think McCain really caught up anywhere. This format was supposed to favor McCain, and he did do better in this second debate than in the first one, but overall Obama still won.
Stephanurus
Thanks for contributing, Eric!
VOTE NADER!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh man,
A caller on C-span just said they were going to write in Mike Huckabee.
I'm really scared for this country.
It's OK, Eric. You didn't waste all that much.
And you wasted another fifteen minutes trying to construct that sentence.
Let's feel sorry for Eric, Mmmkay?
No huge advantage for either side on this debate. I give a slight edge for Obama though I would be willing to call it a tie.
Anything but a game changer is, in practice, a win for Obama since McCain is in a very deep hole right now.
Dow is now over a thousand points down from its last close of the Clinton Administration. And that is not even adjusting inflation and population increase. Wow.
Oh, I'm sorry. What I should have said was "Capital Dam makes me want to vomit". Or some such.
Awww... I had been making comments in the hope of gaining Eric Atkinson's approval.
"Cool hand at the tiller"
Did McCain just endorse Obama???
Either that or the ghost of Paul Newman.
I wanted to mention something. McCain harped on Obama a few times for opposing re-energizing spent nuclear material. Obama is definitely not alone in his opinion; many, many US politicians oppose the process for security reasons (I think it's banned in a few other countries, too). The fear is that terrorists will get ahold of some waste, re-energize it and use it to build a nuclear device. Bad stuff.
@ hubris hurts (#222),
_Creepily_ interesting. Colbert makes a funny out of it.
Man, I can't believe I wasted ten minutes of my life reading the inane comments of this thread.
good thing I didn't waste any time reading your response.
wait...
damn.
Let's pay attention to Eric now. Eric needs attention.
I don't see why so many people are against McCain's plan to spend on nuclear power? Sure, he's an idiot on issues regarding abortion, etc, where he bases his policy on religious beliefs, but I think his idea of investing on nuclear energy is pretty good.
After all, nuclear energy is actually very safe. There may be issues regarding long term storage, but solutions can be found, like disposing it in sealed containers in seismic activity-free zones. Importantly, there are little C02 emissions, and plenty of reserves.
So, please don't irrationally bash this idea as unsafe just because it's "nuclear". It's unscientific.
Papa John on the straight talk express.
A debate should have a winner. Ideas actually do compete and the people who represent and promote an idea bear the burden of proof.
Inasmuch as the evidence or proof of the declamations of the contestants will not be apparent until some time goes by, how do those who claim to know, know?
I'm so tired of this process. It's too much like church.
McCain's waddling back and forth on the stage made me think of a geriatric penguin in a state of advanced dementia.
"My friends! My friends!" *waddle-waddle* *flap-flap* "My friends?" *waddle-waddle*
He seemed to take great pains to make certain that the bracelet on his right wrist was always prominently displayed.
Well, since McCain didn't find the gamechanger he desperately needed, tonight was a win for Obama. All Obama had to do was stay cool and project confidence and control. McCain was the one that had to gain ground. It didn't help that he talked at the people, while Obama talked to them.
And FFS, Sen. McCain, how the hell can you think these people are going to accept your folksy veneer of supposed authenticity when you're just repeating all the same tired stump speech soundbites?
First polls in from CBS: 39% Obama, 35% draw, 27% McCain
No Dan, I don't need any attention. But what I would like is for some insightful analysis of the debate from a science blog. The comments on nuclear power were pretty lame.
Fuck that. Get a box of crackers and watch Family Guy's "I dream of Jesus" episode.
http://www.hulu.com/family-guy
@ PZ,
I also took notice of McCain's rather disrespectful "that one" comment. Another thing noticed was that, similar to the first debate, Obama constantly looked at McCain while the latter was speaking, and yet again the favor wasn't returned.
Poor eric, he spends far too much time on a place he hates. You'd think he'd go somewhere he isn't considered an attention-seeking hack, but maybe such a place doesn't exist.
Anyone else notice McCain wouldn't shake hands with McCain?
the cnn uncommitted voter lines are strangely mesmeric
strangely scary given that there is less than a month to go, and there are still so many "uncommitted" voters.
not surprising, though.
...my good chums.
I didn't really hear anything I liked a lot from either. But did you see Michelle? She looked like she had just taken a deep, soul-clearing breath and begun planning the new decor in the White House! I do hope she gets there.
My friends,
undecided voters again chose Barack Obama as the winner tonight.
McCain is almost senile and arthritic - he made so many references to old history and U.S. Imperial tactics that I feel like I'm 20 again (although I'm 51). Obama's not great, but, is more for rationally changing the current domestic and international policies (which needs to be done), but to do so almost requires Merlin.
Obama won. Or at least, I hope that most people believe McCain lost.
If ever I hear the words "my friends" again, I shall gag.
How about "my fiends"? ; )
Pundits. Of course they loved their boy tonight. I wish I was the pundit reporter. I would ask them
"So Mr. Republican pundit, I only want to know how Obama did,
Mr. Democrat pundit, I only want to know how McCain did.
Might get more interesting answers.
"But what I would like is for some insightful analysis of the debate from a science blog."
You come to the wrong place, ain't no insightful people hear. Just a bunch of opinionated jackases.
McCain's waddling back and forth on the stage made me think of a geriatric penguin in a state of advanced dementia.
more and more like the Penguin every day.
Instead of a past presidential figure, he should have said his idol was Burgess Meredith.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtx97MR08Cg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hg1Rynsy6k4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2Obuh4vqxE&feature=related
...my good chums.
Stiffy and Caribou Barbie...what a pair.
From the little I listened to, Obama seemed like he was doing the "iehovah" puzzle in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. I didn't pay any attention to McCain at all, but people seem to think he came off as a condescending shithead.
That One '08!
I can't wait to get the bumper sticker.
What Siri Agrell said:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/wbStumped0821
Hey you kids! Get off of my lawn!
Everyone knows about Elizabeth Dole's new smear campaign against atheists, right?
http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/10/elizabeth-dole-anti-atheist-bigo…
But my friends,
Pharyngula is way behind DailyKos in poll smashing. We need to invest in new green poll-smashing jobs, and get our special interests into Washington.
In the meantime, here's the list.
Yes, I will never, EVER say "My friend" or "My Friends". If I do, I'll undoubtedly either spontaneously vomit or become a murder victim. Most likely both. Of course,neither will happen if lightening strikes (because I'm lucky).
The "that one" heard round the world.
What an annoying and obnoxious thing to say.
*shakes fist* Get off my lawn!
You want nucular? I give you nucular. ^^
First a little disclaimer: It is not true that all of Europe is cutting back on nuclear power. Germany abandons it, that is true. But France keeps it and there is even a new plant being built in Finland. Although, I'm not absolutely sure about this because there have been "minor" issues in France and especially in Sweden.
Whatever. Nuclear power undoubtedly has a certain list of advantages: High energy output, fuel comes from politically more stable countries (Australia, e.g.), low CO2-emissions. Also, new types of reactors are much more secure. Chernobyl could - by design - not happen in these types of reactors.
But, there are a lot of fallacies:
1.) That another Chernobyl can't happen does not mean that nothing else could possibly happen. Stupid things happen all the time and risk management apparently does not work all the time (see financial crisis).
2.) Uran is a finite resource as well.
3.) Cost! Normally, the owner of a plant is liable for any damage it may cause, e.g. if your coal plant catches fire and destroys parts of the city. So you better get some insurance for that. For nuclear power, on the other hand, the state comes up for all damage in case of a catastrophe. That's need, isn't it? Because power from a nuclear plant would be way too expensive if the plant owner would have to get insurance cover! So, it's highly subsidised by the tax payers.
4.) Waste! "Solutions can be found". How do I put it? Ah: Here is this poisoned apple. Go ahead, eat it. Antidotes can be found in the future. Maybe there will be a solution in the future. Until then, we should be a bit more careful with the ghosts we summon.
A waaaaay better idea would be to spend some money on basic research to get a) renewable energies to more efficiency and b) nuclear fusion a bit closer to reality.
In case someone has not seen it already, here is an interesting article in NY Times on Mavericks!
Who won tonite's debate?
CNN poll : 81 :15 for Obama
MSNBC poll : 85 : 11 for Obama
FOX News poll : 60 : 40 for Obama
Boring.
"My friends" -- if I never hear that again, I still have heard it too much.
I'm Fiscally Conservative, but socially I am Compassionate.
Since I'm not a Christian either, there's no place in the Republican party for me.
Obviously, I'm voting for Obama. But even more, I'm voting against another super duper Xtian on the Supreme Court.
The religious right may have ruined the Republican party beyond possible repair. The party of the Democrats will need an even bigger umbrella to include all the freethinkers.
Change is guaranteed.
We're raping our environment pretty badly to export that uranium overseas. But that's what happens when the leaders determine that Australia's worth is purely in commodities.
Hubris hurts #160, Capital Dan #181,
But... but... Conservapaedia says "Obama is likely to be Muslim because ... Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one". Q.E.D.
Incidentally, I'm amazed that the Conservapaedia editors think that the articles on Obama's and McCain's policies make McCain look good.
CRASH THE DRUDGE REPORT POLL!!!
CRASH THE DRUDGE REPORT POLL!!!
CRASH THE DRUDGE REPORT POLL!!!
CRASH THE DRUDGE REPORT POLL!!!
CRASH THE DRUDGE REPORT POLL!!!
They have McCain winning at 67%...
Doubting Foo,
I think we're safe,even AOL has it 52:43 for Obama.
Interesting point: the McCains were out of the building by 10:45, the Obamas stayed and mingled with the voters for more than 20 mins.
Now, this is purely a style/personality thing, but when those people in that building think "Which candidate is going to care about my interests?" Who do you think is going to come to mind? You lost a lot of points (and likely, votes) there McCain.
You want nucular? I give you nucular. ^^
First a little disclaimer: It is not true that all of Europe is cutting back on nuclear power. Germany abandons it, that is true. But France keeps it and there is even a new plant being built in Finland. Although, I'm not absolutely sure about this because there have been "minor" issues in France and especially in Sweden.
Whatever. Nuclear power undoubtedly has a certain list of advantages: High energy output, fuel comes from politically more stable countries (Australia, e.g.), low CO2-emissions. Also, new types of reactors are much more secure. Chernobyl could - by design - not happen in these types of reactors.
But, there are a lot of fallacies:
1.) That another Chernobyl can't happen does not mean that nothing else could possibly happen. Stupid things happen all the time and risk management apparently does not work all the time (see financial crisis).
2.) Uran is a finite resource as well.
3.) Cost! Normally, the owner of a plant is liable for any damage it may cause, e.g. if your coal plant catches fire and destroys parts of the city. So you better get some insurance for that. For nuclear power, on the other hand, the state comes up for all damage in case of a catastrophe. That's need, isn't it? Because power from a nuclear plant would be way too expensive if the plant owner would have to get insurance cover! So, it's highly subsidised by the tax payers.
4.) Waste! "Solutions can be found". How do I put it? Ah: Here is this poisoned apple. Go ahead, eat it. Antidotes can be found in the future. Maybe there will be a solution in the future. Until then, we should be a bit more careful with the ghosts we summon.
A waaaaay better idea would be to spend some money on basic research to get a) renewable energies to more efficiency and b) nuclear fusion a bit closer to reality.
Clemens et al.,
which part of "Do not submit your post again" do you not understand??
Hey you kids! Get off of my lawn!
I took a snort of hooch every time McWar said - reach across the aisle. I'm sauced.
There's something really wrong with McCain. I just spent a major part of today scrounging and hauling two truck loads of scrap lumber with my parents - my dad is almost 78 years old, and he doesn't do the old man shuffle like McCain.
If Obama isn't lying about giving me the same health care he has, I'm sold. We currently pay over $400 per month,just for my policy on my husbands company offered health/dental insurance.
Yay. Obama addressed the "do not understand" issue. Well, in his own way. I hope I still get the coasters.
Notice in the first few moments McCain made a comment about being delighted (or something of that measure) to have Obama in this "town hall" atmosphere. Obama glared at him intensely for several minutes. After that McCain crumbled and started to pacing stiffly rather than standing/sitting stiffly.
I completely enjoy the way Obama talks to people. It's nice to have a candidate that doesn't talk down to the general public.
Still, it would be nice to give them the "pharyngula effect".
AOL POLL
Drudge
If you want to read about what mccain and his supporters are all about I wrote about a close experience my girlfriend had with the young republicans of texas club here at UT. http://eelonghorn.blogspot.com/
The incident completely destroyed any hope for me voting for the republican party for a long time to come.
Re: "McCain claims to know how to get bin Laden" - is anybody else old enough to remember Nixon's "I have a plan to win in Viet Nam"
Re: Nuclear Energy: didn't Scientific American have an article on 4th generation plants that have 10% of the waste of the standard design?
Sherry (#269) wrote:
It took me too long to notice that myself. I voted for Republicans for many years, but I will probably never vote for them again. A real Republican like Barry Goldwater would be disgusted with today's religious extremist infestation of the Republican party.
Joel @ 255 - Anyone that cannot even spell JACKASS in this highly drunken atmosphere needs to retire from the field & sniff divots.
Well, I think cramming for my biochem test was definitely a better use of my evening than this debate. But thanks for the recap, Pharyngulites.
Huh? Wha? Debate?
Fable 2 is releasing without online co-op? BASTARDS!
Uran(ium) is a finite resource as well.
Well, so is the Sun, technically speaking. :-)
If we use efficient reactors and recycle everything we can, I wouldn't worry about running out of nuclear fuel. I've seen estimates in the range of thousands of years and a few claim millions if you exploit every source such as extracting uranium from seawater.
There's actually discussion of "peak uranium" in energy circles.
I wouldn't worry about running out of nuclear fuel
There's actually discussion of "peak uranium" in energy circles.
these two sentences seem incongruous to me?
...my good chum.
PX wrote: "McCain was the one singing "bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran". "
The lies of the atheist liberals never cease to amaze me.
The chant, PZ, as you well know, is not "bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran", it is "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran."
Get your facts straight.
It's the "drill, drill, drill" saga all over again...
Counting myself as a major booster of nuclear fission, I have to say that as far as McCain is concerned "with friends like these, who needs enemies." A lot of the pro-nuclear blogosphere is pretty firmly on the left--David Walters, Ruth Sponsler, Charles Barton, and Tom Blees, for instance. And McCain's is uninformed pro-nuclear blather. Most of the pro-nuclear bloggers aren't happy with the idea of building large numbers of current Generation III+ reactors. The typical critique of these reactors is largely correct:
1. They cost too much--currently $7,000+/kW. Given the construction and payback time, this makes capitalizing current nuclear plants a nightmare.
2. They take too long to build--4+ years even in relatively unregulated markets such as China.
3. They are inefficient, using only a few percent of the potential energy in natural uranium.
4. They produce too much waste for the power generated, which is messy and expensive to reprocess.
5. Although nowhere near as unsafe as its detractors claim, current reactor designs use engineered safety systems that could fail in an extreme situation.
However, there is a better way--or, indeed, many better ways. The favored reactor design of many nuclear power enthusiasts in the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), which was developed at ORNL in the 1960s and 1970s. These reactors can combine passive safety with excellent proliferation resistance and the ability to breed U-233 from common Th-232. And because the reactor operates at near-atmospheric pressure, it should be possible to mass-produce the major components fairly cheaply. Most impressively, the reactor produces a tiny fraction of the waste volume as current reactors, and can even be configured to burn transuranics from current nuclear reactors. Using Generation-IV reactor designs such as the LFTR, nuclear energy can play a premier role in the fight against climate change. Learn more about the LFTR here.
Jackases. You know, like as Jack. I'm headed out for a Jumbo Jack with Cheese! Make it two/to/too with fries.
Although nowhere near as unsafe as its detractors claim
the argument that they (Generation III reactors) are not "unsafe" always boils down to an argument of relative percentage failure when compared to other power generation methods.
The problem is, that failure has a history of being rather more catastrophic wrt to nuclear power.
this, however, I feel is a much better argument from you:
The favored reactor design of many nuclear power enthusiasts in the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), which was developed at ORNL in the 1960s and 1970s. These reactors can combine passive safety with excellent proliferation resistance and the ability to breed U-233 from common Th-232. And because the reactor operates at near-atmospheric pressure, it should be possible to mass-produce the major components fairly cheaply. Most impressively, the reactor produces a tiny fraction of the waste volume as current reactors, and can even be configured to burn transuranics from current nuclear reactors
...more commentary on your marketing technique:
being dismissive of catastrophic reactor failure isn't necessary, and is really self-defeating. You don't want to be supporting the type III reactors, right?
showing exactly HOW a reactor can be built with demonstrably minimal waste, NO risk of major radioactive contamination even with a catastrophic failure, and still generate useful power cheaply is the way to go here. If you can really do that with LFTR, then just do that, and leave the rest alone. What is being described (if it's not mostly BS), is as different from a type III reactor as solar is from wind power.
still:
nuclear energy can play a premier role in the fight against climate change
a premier role?
really?
I think you might be stretching things more than a bit.
While the reduction in emissions is a good thing, surely nuclear cannot be considered a long-term sustainable technology given the need for mining. It seems like a mid-term fix to a long-term problem and really money could be better spent researching 'renewable' energy sources and working towards reducing consumption.
There are environmental costs greater than just the waste. Mining itself is disasterous for the environment; especially mining uranium.
Keep in mind tho,McCain was trying to make the argument that nuclear energy would create "millions of jobs",which I highly doubt,and his other energy idea was "drill,baby drill",whichis too bad for you if youre a polar bear,and as Obama rightly pointed out,is never going to be enough anyway.
Oh,and by the way,
the third largest stock index in the world,the Nikkei,is crashing,currently 9.5% down.
It seems like a mid-term fix to a long-term problem and really money could be better spent researching 'renewable' energy sources and working towards reducing consumption.
I'd agree completely, except we do in fact need some kind of mid-term fix.
I looked at the link he provided on LFTR's, and did some quick cross checks on the information.
It does indeed look promising from what I can see, and does raise the question as to why Thorium wasn't considered long ago (probably because of the dual nature of reactors also producing weapons materials originally?).
It can't be because of toxicity issues, since thorium dust has about the same problems as uranium dust (a bit less on some things, a bit more on others).
Still, my only problem in thinking this would be a "premier" solution is that it will take too long to shape the politics involved. It could play a role (and I would at least hope that someone will figure out a way to "replace" many of the older type III reactors with this type), but I rather doubt it will ever play a premier one.
More likely, for better or worse, some more politically feasible option will be pushed until such time as "the" long term solution is developed (and agreed on).
I have to admit having not the slightest clue what that will end up being, though.
Congrats, Pharyngula readers. Out of nearly 300 posts so far only a few contain more words than Myers' post itself (150 words). The offenders in chronological order:
Post#, word count
#9, 324
[#154 came close at 138 words]
#266, 331
#291, 317
#293, 293 (!)
This post contains only 50 words.
McCain was trying to make the argument that nuclear energy would create "millions of jobs",which I highly doubt
It's a flat-out lie, so you can go beyond doubting, IMO.
addenda to my last couple of posts...
I think you might be stretching things more than a bit.
...my good chum.
I have to admit having not the slightest clue what that will end up being, though.
...my good chum.
thank you,
...my good chums.
Yeah, true. I guess my concern with having a mid-term fix is that it'll be used as a long term solution until that moment of urgency comes again. No fault of the technology, of course, just the system that implements these kinds of things. I guess I just live in an idealist world where governments would fasttrack research into renewable energies despite the risk of isolating the large energy companies.
Yeah, true. I guess my concern with having a mid-term fix is that it'll be used as a long term solution until that moment of urgency comes again
just so. History says that's what to expect, in fact.
...my good chum.
Where the hell are they getting all these "undecided" voters in the polls? We've been doing the election thang all my adult life, seems like.
What these undecided voters need to consider, since judging the candidates based on the issues seems to be beyond them:
Which wife makes the better first lady?
Cindy McCain, in addition to her baggage from prescription drug addiction, just plain looks like trailer trash. Imagine her, if you will, in jeans and t-shirt instead of fancy duds. Wouldn't you swear she's a meth-head from Redland, Texas? Damn, she looks like five miles of bad road.
Michelle Obama, on the other hand, would look like a lady if she had on a tow sack.
Just sayin'.
//Damn, she looks like five miles of bad road.//
* Smirnoff Ice goes flying over keyboard*
Number of words is a pretty weak metric for gauging the value of a comment. It's true that one can count on posts with more than a thousand words being ranting cut-and-paste jobs that no one will read, but brevity is no guarantee of wit.
about the "undecided" voters...
a few weeks back, the numbers suggested about 18% undecided nationally.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26868632/
not surprising, really (weren't the numbers even larger in the 2000 election?), but assuming that has dropped a bit since, just how valuable do people think a split percentage of say, 15% is in indicating who won this debate?
...my good chums.
The problem is, that failure has a history of being rather more catastrophic wrt to nuclear power.
I beg to differ on this point. In the entire history of civilian nuclear power, there has only been one "catastrophic" nuclear power accident--Chernobyl in 1986. TMI in 1979 destroyed the reactor but caused no deaths, and the current scientific consensus is that the public health impact of the accident was non-existent. Given that Chernobyl was an inherently unstable design with no containment structure operated in direct violation of safety regulations, it is not a good proxy for a serious accident at a western LWR.
It should be clear by now that the current economic crisis means that we will have to pull out of both Iraq and Afganistan but no one can say that and expect to be elected President. It probably also means that we are going to have to hurry up and roll back the Prescription Medicare benefit but no one can say that and expect senior citizens to vote for you.
As for McCain being stiff ... McCain didn't hang around to work the room after the debate like Obama did. My wife suggested that he probably needed to take a piss. After watching the post debate rerun on CSPAN it did appear that she was right.
Neither canidate talked about capital punishment either. That might become more of an issue if other executive teams follow the example of AIG.
The LFTR is, in fact, vastly different from Gen III+ reactors--perhaps not as different from them as solar from wind, but nearly as much so. The advantages of the design derive from its use of molten salt as fuel. This concept seems exotic, but was tested in several prototype reactors and is what makes the LFTR so safe, due to a strongly negative void and temperature coefficient, and the fact that the boiling temperature of the salt is extremely high. Basically, this means that there's no danger of a power excursion, and so the reactor won't destroy itself that way. The other type of major reactor accident, a loss of coolant accident, can be obviated by simple passive measures--a freeze plug. If fuel circulation through the reactor stops and the fuel temperature rises, the freeze plug melts and the fuel salt flows into a shallow, flat dump tank in a safe, non-critical configuration. The high surface area to volume ratio of the fuel in the dump tank facilitates the removal of decay heat. So the reactor can be built to avoid all major accidents without any need for human intervention--or computer controlled safety systems, for that matter. Very basic physical principles keep the reactor in a safe situation. No gimmickry, no BS.
As an astronomer, I am insulted that McCain feels public education in Astronomy is unimportant. At the very least, Astronomy is a vital field for attracting young students into the vital science and engineering fields that they would never have considered as kids.
Also, I don't think equating a planetarium projector with an "overhead projector" is fair at all.
I read somewhere the Dems are doing much better in recruiting those undecided voters.
The confusing bit about your election is that it is really 50 separate elections,I think if it was one election the outcome would be clear by now.
My Friends.
Thorium was killed due to AEC politics under the Nixon Administration. Then-head of the AEC Milton Shaw killed LFTR research in favor of the liquid-metal fast breeder (which actually is much better at producing weapons materials than thorium reactors). As for the supply of thorium, a single US deposit of thorium--at Lehmi Pass--contains enough of this material to supply all US energy (not just electricity) needs for at least 450, and probably 1000+ years. Thorium is a much more common element than uranium. Supplies of the material are likely adequate for a longer period of time than civilization has existed on earth--tens of millenia, potentially much more.
As for the future of nuclear power in a carbon-constrained world, I believe it is very bright. Only time will tell, of course, but right now it looks like every nuclear plant that can be built in the near future will be built somewhere in the world. The Russians, for instance, are planning to build every plant they possibly can between now and 2020, doubling the size of the Russian nuclear fleet and exporting plants to customers such as China. The UK is planning new reactors; Finland is building them; Lithuania is planning replacements for its aging Soviet RBMK-1500s; India has big plans--the list goes on. These are all Gen III designs. Gen IV reactors will become available in the middle of the next decade, and in my view will probably represent most of the generating capacity constructed in the succeeding decades. I could, of course, be wrong; but I would not advise anyone to bet against it.
these two sentences seem incongruous to me?
Not really, no. People discuss the concept of peak uranium, but we're nowhere near it.
In the entire history of civilian nuclear power, there has only been one "catastrophic" nuclear power accident--Chernobyl in 1986.
one is enough, don't you think? Again, you are being dismissive without need.
why even bother to address it, when you are pushing a reactor type that by all accounts simply CANNOT do the same thing that one did?
why?
you just set yourself up for what amounts to unnecessary debate. You claim to not be a nuclear apologist on your site, but then try to defend the indefensible.
I'm telling you now, if you want to get a leg up on being convincing about the value of Thorium/salt reactors, you're doing yourself a disservice by pointlessly defending the previous kinds of reactors.
all you need to do is show how what your presenting is not the same thing at all, and has very different risk/benefits.
you're shooting yourself in the foot, otherwise.
...with radioactive bullets, even.
...my good chum.
The Russians, for instance, are planning to build every plant they possibly can between now and 2020, doubling the size of the Russian nuclear fleet and exporting plants to customers such as China.
still hardly makes nuclear a major player as far as the energy game goes, let alone "premiere".
if you want to do something positive, why not just push for design replacement for those still on the drawing board, especially if they are, as you say, much cheaper to build and run?
you might actually get somewhere with that.
...my good chum.
It might only be a drop in the big bucket, but at least it's something that will make the world just a little bit safer.
Given that Chernobyl was an inherently unstable design with no containment structure operated in direct violation of safety regulations, it is not a good proxy for a serious accident at a western LWR.
The problem is that it still gets used as a bogeyman to a populace that believes in angels and sky buddies. I'm pro nuke, but I'm under no illusion that it will be anything but a really, really, really tough sell to a voter base that has received most of its nuclear power education from the Simpsons. I can't even convince many people that 3MI was proof that even the old safety systems worked and contained the accident.
Actually, in my own intensive polling, I've found that over a certain demographic, this fact actually accounts for at least five percent of the pro Obama vote. And a further indicator of the Michelle Obama influence is that at further five percent of the electorate in this sub-grouping of likely voters is responding "very favorably" to the perception that Barrack and Michelle have a heavy lead in the very important "couples who seem to actually really love, respect and support each other" metric.
Although, I should, in the interests of disclosure point out that this conclusion is based on break outs of my own internal polls of the voting block consisting of, well.. me.
Not really, no. People discuss the concept of peak uranium, but we're nowhere near it.
are you trying to imply that somewhere, someone who actually makes decisions is actually planning ahead?
I'll need a stiff drink to brace myself if the answer might actually be "yes".
Or is it more like we know approximately how long the sun is going to keep fusing hydrogen?
Ichthyic-
You're probably right that I shouldn't go on about the shortcomings of the Gen III designs, but I can't say in good conscience that I really think they pose a major safety risk. They're certainly no more dangerous than, say, large dams--and much less dangerous than climate change. The terrible safety of Soviet reactors is another matter. The Soviets managed to make nearly every possible mistake at least once--Chernobyl most spectacularly, but also in other parts of the nuclear industry. In the long run Gen III+ is a dead end; the AEC knew that in 1948, and nothing has changed. The ultimate fate of the nuclear industry lies with Gen IV; without it, uranium will be depleted within a few centuries.
I do want Gen IV to displace as much of the Gen III+ on the drawing board as possible. At the same time, over the course of the next century the Gen III+ plants built in the next decade will displace a lot of carbon that would otherwise come from coal. I'm not opposed to their construction, but they cannot and will not be the basis of our energy future--which is what John McCain is arguing. That's the point I was originally trying to make--which in retrospect I totally failed at. I apologize for this.
I can't even convince many people that 3MI was proof that even the old safety systems worked and contained the accident.
there are also a lot of other issues relating to even "properly" functioning nuke plants and local ecology that aren't even touched by the "safety" issues surrounding a catastrophic accident.
Have you ever looked at the research on the impacts of the San Onofre Nuclear power plant on the local marine environment, for example? here's a tiny little taste:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/02/05/news/coastal/2_4_0422_24_38…
One might argue that similar issues arise with any power plant, except that we don't see the same things happening around, for example, the non-nuclear plant at Moss Landing.
My point is, why bother even TRYING to defend messy old designs to begin with?
If the salt reactors bypass a great many of the existing issues, it's like trying to argue that cars running on diesel are just fine, when you are really trying to promote running cars on natural gas.
... my good chum(s).
@ Leigh (#303),
"Cindy McCain [...] just plain looks like trailer trash."
"Damn, she looks like five miles of bad road."
I completely disagree with your assessment, and that's all I'm saying.
I'm not going to defend the cooling system that San Onofre uses--it's built to a 1960s design that sucks up a lot of marine wildlife into the water intake. I believe that current NRC regulations prohibit building any new plants with similar cooling apparatus, but I'm not absolutely sure. In any case, this is not a problem of Gen III plants in general; those that use cooling towers, for instance, avoid this problem.
The LFTR can operate efficiently with air cooling, which would avoid all the water-related issues of current nuclear plants--drought-related colling problems, aquatic wildlife impact, etc--and also allow the plants to be sited away from water supplies.
I'm not going to defend the cooling system that San Onofre uses
you learn quickly.
...my good chum.
;)
I think you can actually get the "reactionary" lot on your side (myself included), if you LET them have the point that the previous technology was "bad" (and let's face it, there are a great many problems that simply aren't worth trying to defend).
Get them on your side by NOT arguing with them about the risks of uranium-based reactors, but rather focusing on how salt reactors are entirely different. Salt reactors can't obliterate an entire county if they catastrophically fail? Then that's what to push.
If you want people on your side, don't make them defensive on points that are essentially irrelevant to the one you really want to push (he says, while doing this on a regular basis himself :P )
that's politics, and whatever your conscience dictates, that's how this game is played if you want to have an impact.
I wish you luck.
My bosom buddy chum pals.
Wanna quit dealing with reason and logic and just take out your frustration? Go here:
http://www.drudgereport.com/
Yeah, I know it's icky and it is currently displaying:
McCain 64%
Obama 33%
...with a link right underneath it to the AOL live poll where the numbers are exactly reversed.
interesting.
...my good chum.
foxfire,
we dealt with that about 3 hours ago.....
Re. Kel #270
I have to say I get a bit upset about this argument. While I can agree that Australia isn't treating its environment very well, by far and away the greatest threat is land clearing - mainly from agriculture. It still continues - including, astonishingly, ongoing clearing in the tiny amount of remaining rainforest in Queensland. And just look at a map of Western Australia (where I'm from); the unique and incredibly biodiverse vegetation of what is now the wheatbelt has been almost completely obliterated. The country has three uranium mines (and I realise the sensitivity of their locations), covering an area that probably adds up to less than the area of a single wheatbelt farm. The mining industry (rightly) operates under heavy environmental regulation, and actually does a pretty good job of environmental remediation. Land clearing, desertification and salt (not to mention urban sprawl) are devestating the country - to speak of uranium mining raping the countryside in these circumstances is rather misleading.
Regarding nuclear power as an energy source:
Does anyone here know enough about pebble bed reactors (or can point to a reliable, informative site) to give a description of their likely utility, safety, and cost?
Yeah, I know this may be a tall order, but I don't know enough about this method of generating power to be confident about my abilities to recognize false or bogus information online.
Thanks in advance to anyone who can point me to a few good sources.
I didn't say that agriculture wasn't a problem, but point taken. There are a hell of a lot of problems with farming, and I agree it's far worse than mining. As you said: (and I realise the sensitivity of their locations), that's the issue I was referring to. So yeah, I can see it's misleading and that wasn't my intention. It's had to give a one sentence answer to things without someone take an issue with it ;)
Drudge has Obama at 33%?? Considering the right-wing tinfoil hat brigade over there, that is nothing short of astonishing.
Fair enough. I'll freely admit I don't like the woman. I have an irrational prejudice against rich women who make off with sick women's husbands. Also against rich women who get addicted to drugs and skate off without consequences.
But mostly I despise "values voters" who give such people a pass. It nauseates me that someone like her might occupy Lady Bird or Eleanor's place in the White House.
Wait, so McCain wasn't just pacing around his chair during Obama's speaking turns to be a distraction, but, instead, doing a modified version of the pee-pee dance?
Does anybody else think that after this election, the remaining sane Republicans will splinter off and form their own party? The new Fiscal Responsibility party or something.
Believe me some people would welcome a dialogue on the national debt, what we're going to do when the boomers' social security money dries up, what the cost of everybody's medical care really is, and how shifting the tax burden to future generations like we keep doing is going to affect both our grandkids and us in our "golden" years. I hate it that a conservative approach to these kinds of issues is currently welded to race-baiting, homophobia, xenophobia, cultural imperialism, religious delusion, the embrace of ignorance, and denialism. The Libertarians aren't an alternative, they're just whacked - shutting down government would go over about as well as the shut-down of the credit markets did. If a movement for sanity came together on the right, I think it would have to be a new political party entirely, but they could become a persuasive alternative.
I want some of the drugs that Richard Quest is on,thats for sure.
@ Leigh (#333),
Oh, I'm no fan of Cindy McCain, either. (in a non-corporeal sense, that is) It's just that I shall here refrain from expressing my appreciation of her absolute hawtness, due to a previous incident. (so I lied; I had more to say after all)
*drunk male comment alert*
Id prefer Bristol over Cindy any time of the day and night !
She looks like the 5 times lifted tanned frigid millionaire chicks we get to see in Port Douglas over here,or on the French Riviera,or in Duesseldorf.....
*runs*
[to be read in one's best Gandalf voice]
Do not _tempt_ me!
Peak power=nuclear
Intermediate+base power=coal
WTF
Replace every high tension line pole with a windmill.
Generate power at transmission site.
Convert extra power to storage within windmill structure.
Storage can be mechanical,chemical,biological...whatever the possibilities are endless.
It beats the hell out of the ecological stupidities of coal and nuke...don't ya think?
The one problem it has is that it redistributes wealth to the working man and not some lazy corporate moron.
The answers are before us, no study is needed.
Computational control of a generating grid is now possible.
Windmills turn so slow they will not harm migratory birds.
There is nothing wrong with this other than it will take easy money out of some lazy unconscious elitist Swiss bank account.
We are 30 years late,time to act.Question is which candidate has the balls?
We tried to watch the debate, having watched the first P and the VP, but we agreed that McCain increasingly made our skin crawl. I see from the comments above that I made a wise choice. I truly cannot see why anyone would vote for the man and his animatronic VP candidate. Then again, I never understood how the Shrub won the second time.
Ciao, Jeffrey
"And you wasted another fifteen minutes trying to construct that sentence."
If Eric is a Republican, he probably spent more time than that trying to pay someone else to construct the sentence for him.
McCain was getting close with the hair transplant joke, but what he really needs is an inch or so farther down: a brain transplant. Where is Igor when we really need him?
//so here's an open thread for you all to chatter on...if the software lets you.//
It barely did.
And a few people obviously were a bit swamped with the technical challenge not to double-post LOL
@ tguy #335
Personally, I'm just going independent. I'd have done it sooner if I had realized that NC had open primaries.
Well - here in Sydney, the debate was on at Noon and I was home with my sons (this is a "school holiday" fortnight here), so drinking during the debate was probably not the best thing to do. (But - ask John Wilkins if Bundy'n'coke around midday is Kosher or not..) So, anyway, after seeing the debate and some of the aftermath on Kos, HuffPo etc, I am *finally* having a couple ... [goes to refresh...] whilst reading this thread and enjoying "having a few with like-minded friends" somewhere a couple of hundred posts up-thread - just posting this here now as a benchmark that I *was* sober somewhere within this thread, even though I probably won't be by the time I make it down to my own comment! (And by then the duplicate and triplicate posts will make much more sense, I figure.)
I am *soooo* waiting for my absentee ballot from Mercer County, NJ to arrive so I can cast my vote for "That One" (but McLost wouldn't use caps, eh?) but - PZ - I *do* wish you would lighten up on Obama a bit. Several months ago I was quite impressed by the opinion article Caroline Kennedy wrote in the New York Times about Obama, and as an ex-pat yank down under, the recent American administration and current Republican attitudes have been such a total embarrassment and Obama such a breath of fresh air that this upcoming election means a lot to me. Please. PZ - vote for That Dude!
(signed) marc
... [returns to remainder of the first hundred comments]
That was a $3 million earmark submitted by Obama to replace the 40 year old star projector at the Adler Planetarium in Chicago. Calling it an "overhead projector" shows how out of touch Grandpa McCain is, and he has been attacking this for a while. Among many others, Phil Plait has already blogged about this:
John McCain: literally antiscience
//Well - here in Sydney, the debate was on at Noon and I was home with my sons (this is a "school holiday" fortnight here), so drinking during the debate was probably not the best thing to do//
What a girl you are !
Im in Melbourne,and i opened my first Smirnoff Ice at the second " My Friends" McCain threw out.10 past noon i guess.And still going...:-)
I'd like to see a substantiated report that demonstrates how much carbon gets burned in order to build, fuel, and run nuclear power plants. The same for CO2 absorbing technology that purports to sequester carbon without needing to burn more of the same to manufacture that tech.
I was reading the Eschaton threads as my play-by-play... Someone there had also chosen 'my friends' as their drinking phrase. I hear they're pulling through; the stomach pump teams were on full alert yestereve.
Just sayin', tho'... if you actually chose 'my friends' as your drinking phrase in the first place and actually have watched McCain previously, maybe, umm... you really *wanted* to go to the hospital?
//the stomach pump teams were on full alert yestereve.//
We used to do that a lot in the 80s and 90s,until someone figured out that it has a high risk of aspiration to ram a big hose down your stomach when youre half unconscious,to flush the vodka out by pouring in a 50L bucket of salty water.
So,fun as it was,we dont do it anymore....:-)
Aside from the mechanics of whether that is true, there is a fundamental problem with that.
You can't create "millions of jobs" in the nuclear power industry without increasing the education of the american public. You will need to educate hundreds of thousands more scientists and engineers qualified to work in the nuclear industry. You can't put Homer Simpson in charge of safety.
Granted, there will be a burst of manufacturing jobs, but in terms of long-term job growth, these are highly skilled positions that can only be filled by properly educated people. Without a similar committment to eduction, we can't pull that off.
Still having trouble posting. Does Science Blogs actually have a computer person, or is there just a helper monkey banging on a server somewhere until it fixes itself?
@MTran:
Here's a starting point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_Bed_Reactor
There's also an obscure site you may have heard of:
http://www.google.com/
I hear a lot of people use it to search for info. ;-)
Here's a more scientific explanation of the tongue show from the Center for Nonverbal Studies.
http://members.aol.com/nonverbal2/tonguesh.htm#TONGUE-SHOW
Their entire dicionary can be found here:
http://members.aol.com/nonverbal2/entries.htm#Entries
Tweedledee and Tweedledum "Debate"
"""Last night both McCain and Obama made it quite clear that US imperialism is unstoppable. They committed to "protecting" Israel from Iran without flinching. They indicated the US will police the world against "genocide". They agreed to send non-existent US tax dollars to support Georgia and any other "democratic" government. Both were in favor of expanding the war in Afganistan to include Pakistan. The list goes on and on.
To fund these adventures they both agreed domestic programs will have to be cut. I do not disagree that domestic spending needs to be cut but it seems odd that it is the American people who will have to suffer so the imperialism can continue.
Neither one of them ever mentioned the Constitution. There was much talk about "US interests". Mostly it appears protecting "US interests" means using the US military to protect the ability of corporations to maintain assets in parts of the world where the local governments are either unwilling or unable to provide an appropriate level of security.
The corporations our military is protecting are the same ones that close operations here in America, lay-off American workers, ship the jobs overseas and keep their profits off-shore. These corporation do not deserve one drop of American blood."""
How the extreme right and left tried to stop the Wall Street bailout
"""The folks on Capitol Hill, who initially opposed this bill, and then supported a more pork-laden version of it, represent everything that is wrong with American government. The "extremists" of both parties who fought it represent the only hope for real political change and national salvation.
Conservatives and liberals more comfortable with the false left-versus-right divide offered every four years, can now make themselves comfortable with the grandest socialist experiment in American history. But as the big government Democrats love continues to collude with the big corporations Republicans love, concerned patriots of any stripe might finally discover that the so-called "lunatic fringe," as represented by men like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, isn't so loony after all. """
Of all the debates, this was easily the most boring.
For a candidate who's been on the attack lately, I expected some fireworks from McCain. Instead, wet sponges.
I think his strategists argued a lot before this debate: Attack or stick to the issues? Since attacking has been failing, I think they made a strategic decision to back off on the attacks, and that left McCain with nothing.
McCain's health: Maybe I'm missing something, but I see McCain walking around that stage, with his death grip on the mic -- I didn't see it move out of his right hand -- combined with virtually no ability to turn his head, and what appears to be puffiness in his left cheek that left him talking only out of the right side of his mouth, leading to a lisp, and I think he's had a stroke.
I've had stroke victims in my family, and I don't take this issue lightly. But he really reminds me of my family members. That's one medical report we, as voters, have a right to see. I wasn't going to vote for McCain anyway, but fence-sitters who really are not sure need to know. We can't have a political clone of Clarence Thomas as our vice president, and if we do, we need to know McCain's neurological status. Palin would be a terrible president, and I mean terrible. So how healthy is McCain?
SfO,
If you're going to copy-paste, it's polite to at least tell us where you're copy-pasting from.
@ cyan | October 7, 2008 10:09 PM
Anyone keeping track of the number of times that this lying phrase has been uttered?
I checked the official transcript of the debate. McCain says "my friends" 22 times.
I thought the "bomb Iran" was one of McCain's few saving moments, in that he had the grace and courage to admit: yes, he said it, and it was a joke with another veteran. I also felt his tone was reasonably contrite. The joke is on a par with a pro-lifer telling dead baby jokes: arguably tasteless, and bad PR if it gets out, but funny if you overlook those.
I also felt his "what I don't know is what the unexpected will be" and subtext of "I've had to deal with the unexpected before" to have been a slightly better answer than Obama's response on similar lines. I would have preferred one of them saying "and when I encounter the unexpected in an area I don't know enough about, I'll find the smartest people I can get to help me find what I need to know to make my decision."
I suspect that as McCain senses the failing of the campaign, he's seeing less and less reason to pander to the base, and is starting to favor speaking his mind over soundbites. This may help him swing the middle ground towards the end, but probably not enough to take the election.
And after eight years under president GWB, certainly not enough for me to cast my vote for anyone running as a Republican, ever. GO-bama.
JefferyD!!!! Wooo-Hoo!
Big hug and a *SMOOCH*
JefferyD!!!! Wooo-Hoo!
Big hug and a *SMOOCH*
"""Now, however, with an economic downturn in full swing, ordinary people are losing their homes, their retirement savings and soon they'll likely be losing their jobs as well. Ordinary people are seeing their financial security destroyed by a form of corporate socialism/welfare (fascism for those in the know) that they've never witnessed before. Ordinary people are starting to realize that John McCain and Barrack Obama are working for the same people and that when it comes right down to it, they have the same agenda. Ordinary people are realizing that Ron Paul was telling the truth when he said that our foreign and economic policies were destroying our once great nation..."""
Re. Kel #331
OK fair dos. Sorry it's a bit of a hobby horse! It's not that I'm particularly pro-mining, just that I find the environmental focus in Aus to be a bit too heavily oriented in that direction, when other problems seem to me rather more pressing.
Anyway.
Hubris hurts wrote: "McCain: 'Let's not raise taxes on anyone' in one breath, then talks about our multi-trillion dollar debt in the other. I don't like paying taxes either, but how are we to pay down this debt?"
Why is it ALL Republicans say this, but they never explain how to get rid of the enormous debt they've accumulated while running Congress and the White House for the first six years of W's presidency!
Did I miss some memo regarding the use of triple quotations? Is that some sort of secret libertarian signal? (Man, it would be really helpful if that were the case -- I think I could write a script to detect that...)
"""And these men we have running for president, where are they on this? Initially, both Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama expressed their tentative approval of the bailout, oops, I mean rescue bill, and then began backtracking when the extent of voter disapproval made itself known. A few days later, they came to agree on the necessity of it, thereby illustrating beyond any lingering doubt that, as Ron Paul puts it, "our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people."
People being what they are, many folks of a partisan bent like to blame the other party for the mess we find ourselves assigned, against our will, to clean up. Who dug the hole? Be assured that both Republican and Democratic politicians have been shoveling away at it for many years. Democrats say the GOP is at fault for foisting upon us various deregulations that caused the mortgage mess that triggered the credit implosion. But Tom Donlan says in Barron's that the problem is not that there weren't enough regulators or regulations, but that the regulators "were not sane." In an opinion piece, Mr. Donlan says, "Regulation and regulated institutions encouraged the risk-taking, helped to finance it and continue to excuse it."
Republicans accuse the Democrats of pressuring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into creating a market for toxic mortgages. Again, Mr. Donlan: "Who did the pressuring? A string of presidents and their appointees at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and a legion of congressmen inspired by housing activists dreaming of home ownership for all." Republicans. Democrats. They're all in it together, an idea those partisans and their media champions find difficult to accept, even though it seems to me undeniable.
I find it strangely satisfying that Congressman Paul, the little Texan who was soundly thrashed in his Quixotic quest for the Republican presidential nomination - the man who was laughed at and mocked as a kook when he tried to alert us all to the fragile and unsustainable nature of our money system - is now seen by more and more Americans as the one politician who told us the truth. No wonder the system spit him out.
The plan bulldozed through Congress last week carries with it dire implications about the future of our country. To redistribute income upward as this does means the game is over. We live in an age looking suspiciously like that of other empires in their late periods of decay, and if you don't know what that portends, it's probably just as well."""
Why is it ALL Republicans say this, but they never explain how to get rid of the enormous debt
Why is it ALL democrats ignore the counter-examples to their sweeping pronouncements like the one above?
Gee, it's fun to wave that broad brush around, isn't it?
The fact is, the only member of congress to consistently call for (and vote for) reductions in taxes and spending throughout his tenure, is a Republican. He's the one who's called for bringing all US forces home from the 130 countries around the world where we have bases for no good reason, which would make a pretty good start on paying down that debt.
There is a way out of this mess, but doing so is not to the advantage of those who currently hold power over us. The way out is to sharply reduce government spending, preferably by giving up the role of "policeman of the world."
This means shutting down many of the most lucrative pork-barrel schemes that exist, such as building invisible bombers that are too precious to use, or updating weapons that can already annihilate the entire human species.
-jcr
I did my solemn duty to defend by country and constitution: I've already voted absetnee for Obama. It was a thrill to vote for a qualified and inspiring candidate who happens to be African-American.
If you are undecided, please read about the B.S. Express at:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/pr…
Oops: how about "my country" and "absentee"
[viking] Spam spam spam spam , spam spam spam spam, SPAAAAAAAM! [/viking]
Quiet Desperation,
Thanks for the links I've already gone to. I was hoping for a bit of thought on the part of a poster, but perhaps a politics thread on bio site is not the place to ask for recommendations for readable, reliable links to a physics or economics issue.
Pebble bed reactors are an interesting energy option, but the only person I know (knew) who ever worked with them passed away some time ago. Since then, I've not heard them mentioned in any policy discussion regarding energy, nuclear or otherwise.
The technology has faced some negative publicity in the past, as has all nuclear energy. But if the US is finally ready to seriously consider all energy possibilities, then it seems that pebble bed could be a useful part of the discussion. But, again, this doesn't seem to be the right thread for the issue.
Sorry to inconvenience you with a question.
MTran-
It's seldom updated now, but can I suggest the Pebble Bed Reactor Blog? The author has good links. Eskom's official PBMR webpage is here.
Eric Atkinson @ 224 & 244:
and
I think I can help you out. You seem to have completely mistaken the general ambience of Pharyngula.
In my mind, at least, Pharyngula is less like a political analysts' tit-for-tat show, and more like someone's (Dr. Myers', in this case) living room, wherein we have all been invited to sit and watch the tube, making editorial comments and asides about the programs, throwing popcorn at the screen when the spirit (or whatever we atheists use instead) moves us, and BSing when a topic or distraction holds our attention. All with great and whooping cameraderie. And alcohol, added to individual tastes.
Mean to say, dude, you may have come to the wrong address. Check your invitation again.
And Ichthyic....you're making me nervous, going on about how we are all good chum.... :)
Eric Atkinson @ 224 & 244:
and
I think I can help you out. You seem to have completely mistaken the general ambience of Pharyngula.
In my mind, at least, Pharyngula is less like a political analysts' tit-for-tat show, and more like someone's (Dr. Myers', in this case) living room, wherein we have all been invited to sit and watch the tube, making editorial comments and asides about the programs, throwing popcorn at the screen when the spirit (or whatever we atheists use instead) moves us, and BSing when a topic or distraction holds our attention. All with great and whooping cameraderie. And alcohol, added to individual tastes.
Mean to say, dude, you may have come to the wrong address. Check your invitation again.
And Ichthyic....you're making me nervous, going on about how we are all good chum. :)
Not fair. I followed the instructions. I checked before posting a second time. Mine wasn't there. So now it is. Twice.
Apologies.
John C. Randolph@369,
I agree with you on this: the USA should renounce its role as "world policeman" and bring its troops home. I don't believe it will, but circumstances will force a substantial retreat, whoever is President. What the election will decide, barring sudden death, disgrace or other ways of removing candidate or elected politicians, is whether McCain or Obama will be President during this period. Which of them will do it best? How do you see Palin managing if McCain wins then keels over?
Dear cicely;
Your description of Dr. Myers living room as a parallel to Pharyngula may be indeed correct, as is much a it seems to be a site for "certain" kinds of atheists and "certain" kinds of political and scientific thought. What I am hearing is that the "invited" can spew any type of bullshit they wish, be protected from dissenting opinions,and can insult those who hold those dissenting opinions. Which is of course ok because this is the good doctors site. Maybe he should require registration like the Kos kids do to prevent the "invited" from having their delicate ideals from being revealed as bullshit, as it often is.
I don't think anyone is worried about having their delicate ideals rendered into anything - your arguments (and I use the term loosely) are unlikely to poke holes in a piece of wet toilet paper, and so our ideals are safe from the terrifying depredations of Republican logic (another term used loosely).
The last thirty years of history have told us (well, those of us not in a coma) in no uncertain terms that whatever Republicans may state as their policies in public has little relationship with what they actually do, much like the relationship between life forms possessing DNA to one another. If Republicans wanted to argue rationally for their positions, the floor's been open - but they seem to instead rely on code words and outright lies. That doesn't seem like the behavior of a political party with logical and irrefutable beliefs, but one which is morally, intellectually, and financially (well, at least their government - I'm sure their pockets are OK) bankrupt. So if you actually have an argument to make rather than whining about what a put-down minority you are, have at it - though it would be rather strongly out of character for either you or your party.
McCain or Obama will be President during this period. Which of them will do it best?
Given that they both voted for the bailout, I am convinced both are hopelessly incompetent to serve as president. Asking which of them will do it "best" is wishful thinking.
How do you see Palin managing if McCain wins then keels over?
Very poorly, which is the same expectation I have of Biden's performance if something happens to Obama.
-jcr
To redistribute income upward as this does means the game is over.
Well, that's been going on for quite a long time, although not quite as blatantly as in this past week. The entire purpose of the Federal Reserve, for example, is to transfer wealth from anyone accepting dollars to the banks which own the Fed, through inflation.
The silver lining is that as the empire collapses, unlike Rome, we have an opportunity to restore the republic.
-jcr
Eric, if you'd like to present a thoughtful opinion or reasoned argument, I'm sure you'd find people willing to engage you on them. FFS, a nuclear technology discussion has broken out in here. You had the opportunity to introduce a topic, to bring in some of that "insightful analysis" you wished for. Granted, as Cicely described, that might not have gone over in the popcorn throwing MST3K atmosphere of the thread, but you could have tried before bitching.
Anybody else notice how McCain has recently been doing a Reagan impersonation when he speaks? Part of the reason it is so noticeable is that earlier in the summer, when he was being a major Iraq hawk, he was impersonating Dubya.
Another guy who was overfond of the phrase "My friends" is Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. Kind of makes sense, doesn't it?
Sovietologist, Thank you for the links. I've bookmarked them.
Fair enough. I never liked MST3K, they made some really bad movies worse.
Scott from Oregon, if you're actually reading rather than cutting and pasting from an unknown and unattributed source, I ask you this again:
What do you suggest as a course of action in this election, here and now? Who are you going to vote for, and how do you intend to defend that vote?
Are you actually going to answer this question or are you going to dodge it like Sarah?
Every time McCain said " a cool hand at the tiller" I couldn't help thinking " a cool hand IN the till."
(Keating is now a verb.)
He one upped Nixon's 'Peace with Honor', which worked out great.
There are a lot of things to knock Tricky Dick for, but if you're trying to paint him as a warmonger, you should admit that he was a great improvement over Johnson and Kennedy. He ended our involvement in Vietnam (which they started), and he also instituted the "détente" policy which greatly reduced the cold war tensions. Can you imagine Johnson going to China?
-jcr
Didn't RMN (via Kissinger) torpedo the attempted peace process the Democrats were working on in 1968 so that we could leave Vietnam under similar terms > 4 years later, and authorize illegal bombing in Cambodia? Those don't exactly seemed like the acts of a peacemaker - since killing the peace process was done (solely?) to screw the Democrats, he was either a warmonger (believing that either the war could be won or through war improved terms could be bought) or a murderer. Neither of those seem like an actual improvement.
Eric:
Just to clarify; I didn't say or mean to imply that you aren't "invited", or that you should consider yourself "uninvited" (not my living room, not my place); just that this might not be the party you were looking for.
And that being pelted with popcorn is the risk everyone has to face.
"What do you suggest as a course of action in this election, here and now? Who are you going to vote for, and how do you intend to defend that vote?"
The POTUS is a done deal. Obama will be president.
I suggest looking for paleoconservatives, sometimes called "Ron Paul conservatives" running for house seats. Lots of optimism and energy there, plus a novel way of looking at the Federal Reserve (the initial cause of the current crises), The Central Banksters (who are showing you they run the country right now, if you are noticing) and that dreaded document, The Constitution.
Here is a guy not in my state that is young and smart and a doctor/scientist/businessman, who is running 4th district, North Carolina...
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/
Learn about the Fed, learn about monetary policy, learn about central banking, think about our 11 trillion dollar debt, and stop feeding into the sytem that is heading us all over the precipice and taking away our Bill of Rights...
Hell, no, Lyndon didn't go to China. He was too busy getting Great Society legislation passed and laying his own and all future Southern Democrats' political future on the altar for the greater good by signing the Civil Rights Act.
In retrospect, maybe Tricky Dick's trip to the Orient wasn't such a wonderful idea after all. Where are our manufacturing jobs, dude?
Well fuck, this didn't take long:
http://www.thatone08.com/
Wait, so McCain wasn't just pacing around his chair during Obama's speaking turns to be a distraction, but, instead, doing a modified version of the pee-pee dance?
sounds like the basis for an excellent commercial for Depends.
hey, if Bob Dole can do Viagra commercials, surely McCain can do Depends commercials.
"If I had been wearing my depends that night, you betchya I would have won that debate!"
I am not now, nor shall I ever be John McCains "friend".