Slashdot Mirror
Vint Cerf and Others Form Advocacy Group
Omega writes "Vint Cerf, father of TCP/IP, and several Nobel Prize winners have formed a 527 committee called 'Scientists and Engineers for Change.' Among their major complaints are that the Bush administration has ignored and misused scientific findings to achieve political goals and that it has stifled scientific research. While the group isn't officially endorsing Kerry, Dr. Cerf points out it's pretty obvious what their goal is."
"While the group isn't officially endorsing Kerry, Dr. Cerf points out it's pretty obvious what their goal is."
Yes, it is obvious. They are circumventing campaign finance laws by campaigning for Senator Kerry, and against President Bush, in the guise of an issue advocacy group.
I thought we all decided 527s were evil and borderline-illegal ever since the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth started airing out Senator Kerry's dirty laundry. I guess they are a good thing this week.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Scientists should not use their status to give political affiliation a veneer of legitimacy, as our opinions are no more valid than truck drivers, shop assistants or lumberjacks.
Except they are giving lectures on how this administration has been insanely worse than any previous administration when it comes to science. Former administrations simply ignored scientific reports from within the government they didn't like, knowing that few would read a 500 page report on some toad's habitat. But this administration has been so paranoid that they actually rewrite them. Plus there is increasing evidence that they use very shallow political judgements decide how grant money is allocated. This is an issue that effects scientist directly and they have just as much right as lumberjacks to talk about how the administration's contempt for them hurts truck drivers and shop assistants too.
This probably isn't the most important issue on most people's radar this year, but it's still an important issue if you, or someone you care for, plans to live on this planet 10, 20, 30 years from now. The world won't come to an end, but our economy will suffer, and hence people will die, if we don't remove our collective heads from the sand.)
On the one hand Kerry says he is personally against abortion. On the other hand Kerry has support Roe v. Wade and keeping abortion legal.
Some people insist there is some contradiction in these two positions. These people see the world as black and white and like simple slogans such as, "you're either with us or against us."
Kerry has a personal, possibly religious, opinion on an issue. Why is it a sign of weakness or deception if he doesn't insist everyone in the US of A (or the world) adhere to that same viewpoint? The church says it's a sin to eat meat on Friday. Is it a travesty Kerry doesn't insist on that law as well? Opps, apparently that's not a sin anymore. Guess the pope likes to flip-flop on the issues.
Anyway, those who like to insist someone's political stands must conform to their religious beliefs should remember, the government operates by force. Laws are enforced at gun point, whether by police or armies. I know the US of A is not under martial law, I don't see tanks rolling down the street, so it's easy to forget.
Almost all the people work well in the construct of society almost all the time without the physical manifestation on the government's powers. But every law, every regulation, is backed with that final threat of enforcement. So when you take matters of faith and institute that into law, you are trying to ensure faith by force.
I'm not saying politicians should equivocate and play both sides of an issue without reproach. I'm saying we should expect a politician's personal actions to support what they are saying are their political and personal beliefs. Kerry's record supports what he says is his political stand. As to his personal actions and his religious beliefs--how he would council a family who was considering an abortion--I do not know. How does that make him a lying bastard?
Holding a religious belief makes you a person of faith. Using force, or the threat of force, to make everyone else conform to your religious belief makes you a wakko nut job. These are the people who shoot doctors, kill children, fly planes into buildings, and in general ruin the game for the rest of us.
Several, actually. You can find them on johnkerry.com/issues/technology/plan. I just cherry-picked a few examples:
- Provide substantial research increases for clean energy, medicine, advanced manufacturing, information technology, nanotechnology, and other priorities.
- Extend the Research & Experimentation tax credit
- Provide a tax credit to ensure that broadband access is universal and affordable
- Expand spectrum that is available for wireless broadband
- Remove restrictions on federal funding of stem cell research
These and other ideas are laid out in fairly impressive detail on the site. The first point is most important to me. Bush completed the planned 5-year doubling of the NIH budget only by a technicality in 2003, and both it and the NSF are taking a big hit this year. His budgets plan further cuts in following years. Science is not a priority for him. It is for Kerry.