Slashdot Mirror
Call for a Presidential Debate on Science
Writer Matthew Chapman recently wrote a piece for the Washington Post calling for a science-only Presidential debate. While I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the candidates to embrace such a potentially difficult series of questions, a bit more emphasis on modern science and technology certainly couldn't hurt. "None of the candidates should know in advance what questions they might face. Not knowing the questions in advance would force them to study as much science as possible, and this in itself would be a marvelous thing. However, a statement would be read at the start stating that no one expects politicians to understand every aspect of the many scientific disciplines. The debate's tone would try not to be adversarial, but cordial and educational. It could even be fun."
On the Republican side the first, and I mean *first* question would be about "Intelligent Design". The next would be about stem cell research. Things would go downhill from there. And the answers would be gone over with a fine tooth comb for items to ridicule, inspire outrage, or generate fear of the Impending Christofascist Regime (TM).
On the Democrat side, there'd be no questions to ask, since the Democrats and MSM are in complete agreement on all the major issues.
So, the Republicans aren't going to play because of the "Gotcha!" factor, and the Democrats won't play because, well, who needs boring TV?
668: Neighbour of the Beast
"What sort of physical conditions (pressure, temperature) would have to exist to produce carbon from a mix of hydrogen and oxygen? ;)"
Pick one of the following:
A)This will naturally occur due to Global Warming.
II)This will occur because of the war in Iraq.
3) Religious Nutball, everyone knows that's impossible.
e) All of the above
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
By forcing religion upon everyone, you mean the Environmental Earth worshipping Wackos who are foisting the idea of Global Warming, right?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
"who are almost by definition smart, personable people)"
LOL. Three words. George W. Bush. He sure is personable but there is almost no way anyone would call him "smart" at this point. You might retort that he must be smart to graduate Yale and Harvard Business school but I imagine he used and abused his family's name, power and connections to accomplish that, much the same way he ducked Vietnam, a court martial for shirking his national guard duty, and a felony conviction for whatever he was arrested for in Texas that his family got turned in to community service(probably drug possession but who knows for sure).
Of course there are different kinds of "smart". Maybe he is "smart" in terms of "street smart" and being a "smart" politician and "smart" at getting elected, but it is indisputable that he he extremely dumb in every arena necessary to be a good President like economics, history, diplomacy, military tactics and strategy. Its also widely reported he is one of the least curious and inquiring people on the planet and thirst for knowledge is a basic staple of being really smart.
@de_machina
He's the President and you're some fucking guy posting on a web board.
He's vastly, colossally powerful and influential, in addition to being incredibly wealthy.
He's set for the rest of his life, to do with it as he pleases.
So, while I appreciate your totally partisan attack, I'll take his kind of smart over your "loser in his mom's basement" smart any day of the week.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.