|
On February 25 2012 12:23 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2012 12:21 Signet wrote:On February 25 2012 12:16 Voltaire wrote:You might be surprised (due to the level of intelligence in debates), but all GOP candidates this year have post-graduate education (furthermore, most candidates have post-graduate education in the last 50 years or so). Santorum and Romney both have MBA and JD; Gingrich has a PhD in history; Ron Paul is, as you may know, a medical doctor. I actually think the four of them are pretty intelligent, if not very intelligent. Gingrich may be a bit eccentric, but he's certainly not stupid. The candidates portray themselves as carefully crafted characters; the real men beneath are putting on a calculated show. Santorum has some views that are very old fashioned and extreme, but it's not because of stupidity. I think Paul's main problem is his charisma and inability to take charge of the debates like the other three candidates have done at times. Yes. The truly stupid candidates have already imploded. Frankly the 2020 moon base was nothing short of stupid.
It wasnt even the fact that it was a base.
It was the fact that he said they would do manufacturing there. Unless I am mistaken, I dont think the moon has any scarce natural resources that we don't have here on earth. Theres nothing that you can make on the moon that would be cheaper than making it here. Hes beyond stupid.
|
On February 25 2012 13:40 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2012 12:23 Djzapz wrote:On February 25 2012 12:21 Signet wrote:On February 25 2012 12:16 Voltaire wrote:You might be surprised (due to the level of intelligence in debates), but all GOP candidates this year have post-graduate education (furthermore, most candidates have post-graduate education in the last 50 years or so). Santorum and Romney both have MBA and JD; Gingrich has a PhD in history; Ron Paul is, as you may know, a medical doctor. I actually think the four of them are pretty intelligent, if not very intelligent. Gingrich may be a bit eccentric, but he's certainly not stupid. The candidates portray themselves as carefully crafted characters; the real men beneath are putting on a calculated show. Santorum has some views that are very old fashioned and extreme, but it's not because of stupidity. I think Paul's main problem is his charisma and inability to take charge of the debates like the other three candidates have done at times. Yes. The truly stupid candidates have already imploded. Frankly the 2020 moon base was nothing short of stupid. It wasnt even the fact that it was a base. It was the fact that he said they would do manufacturing there. Unless I am mistaken, I dont think the moon has any scarce natural resources that we don't have here on earth. Theres nothing that you can make on the moon that would be cheaper than making it here. Hes beyond stupid. Well I think there's helium 3 which could be a good resource to have and could be extracted from the moon, but I can't imagine we have technology capable of harvesting it economically. The price of launching to the moon is high - but launching to the moon AND coming back with a cargo - that would cost billions per trip...
So basically, probably not now 
That said, eventually, a moon base and more space exploration and research would be good, even for reasons which aren't necessarily immediately economical. 2020, 13000 people? Be serious, we don't need a full blown colony on Earth's wasteland satellite.
|
On February 25 2012 07:29 Tula wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2012 04:14 Doublemint wrote:On February 25 2012 03:56 junemermaid wrote:On February 24 2012 22:16 Doublemint wrote://edit: Though I should add that yes, I don´t see how the catholic church can "compromise" on the contraception/abortion issue, and therefore Santorum got a point. But seeing how much society changed after the 60s and the fact that catholics rather dismiss those rules nowadays gets the church in a very uncomfortable situation, and their only answer seems to get back to the "roots" and alienate themselves even more from believers. At least that´s mainly the case in Europe - can´t tell much about the US since Christians for the most part there have not been a part of the "club" for quite some time^^. I should read up more on evangelicals etc.  The actual Bible says nothing about abortion and there is plenty of scripture to indicate that a newborn <1 year old does not have the same worth as a normal person. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/abortion.html Taking snippets of the gospel and interpreting them literally is not the way it´s done (it´s actually the same way fundamentalists do it as well), and I am not a theologian by any means. So please don´t take it personally when I don´t accept this blunt form of criticism. Maybe we got someone here who can shed more light here(philosophy/theology major) As a historian i can tell you that it doesn't really matter a lot what the bible says. What 2000 years of tradition says is much more important to our modern church. In fact what 300 years of tradition says is considered far more important :p As silly as it is, most of the controversial issues the catholic church argues about have no basis in the bible. Priests must not marry? No abortion? No contraceptives? None of that has anything to do with the bible. Celibacy among priests was invented in the 12th century etc. I am not quite sure what the USA "rights" use to justify their arguments, but the Catholic church basically argues like this: What the holy seat says must be right! (Which also isn't backed up by the bible btw.) The holy seat said XY in 1600! Therefor it must be so! Arguing with people like that is frustrating at best, so i stopped bothering quite a few years ago. There are many good things about christian values, but frankly they have become warped and perverted since the bible was written.
Thank´s for your post! I can relate to your explaination. Quite some years ago when I was still away from uni, my religion teacher (she was a nun) used to say, not without a sense of self irony which u rarely see in faithful Christians, "Jesus wanted to bring heaven to earth, but what he was able to do was the establishment of the Catholic Church." - I am just paraphrasing here since it´s been quite a while. The disconnect from Rome and its believers gets more and more evident.
|
It's a bit sad how small the crowds the Republican candidates draw are. Nothing showed it worse than the Mitt Romney speech, where he talked to 1200 people on the field of a stadium that could seat 65000.
|
Speaking at an Americans for Prosperity event in Michigan on Saturday, Ann Romney introed her husband to the stage, as she often does. But she also added that Romney won't be attending any more debates, if they are scheduled.
"I've also decided no more debates," she said. "If we do another debate, he's going to sit in the audience and watch me."
Source
|
On February 26 2012 03:59 ticklishmusic wrote: It's a bit sad how small the crowds the Republican candidates draw are. Nothing showed it worse than the Mitt Romney speech, where he talked to 1200 people on the field of a stadium that could seat 65000.
german politicians would be happy if 1200 people would bother to go to their boring speeches
|
What I'll find really funny is if after the GOP primaries there isn't anyone the republicans actually support left. Collectively send a "sorry, we're just gonna cede this election because our candidates were retarded" I know there's no way it'll actually happen, but I feel that with the current candidates, and Obama being as centralist as he has been lately, I can see a lot republicans voting for Obama, just so whoever the GOP manages to prop up doesn't get in and really screw things up...
|
On February 26 2012 03:59 ticklishmusic wrote: It's a bit sad how small the crowds the Republican candidates draw are. Nothing showed it worse than the Mitt Romney speech, where he talked to 1200 people on the field of a stadium that could seat 65000.
It's a politician speaking... it's not like entertainment. How many people do you want to show up? 30k? That would be pretty outrageous. Didn't Newt get like 30 people in a place that could hold 500? 1200 is pretty good turnout for Zzzz..
|
On February 24 2012 17:18 Bandino wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 17:02 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:DALLAS, Texas – Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum said Thursday that President Obama wants more young adults to go to college so they can undergo “indoctrination” to a secular world view.
In an hour-long interview with conservative television host Glenn Beck, Santorum also defended his record on abortion and his vote in favor of President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind education law.
On the president’s efforts to boost college attendance, Santorum said, “I understand why Barack Obama wants to send every kid to college, because of their indoctrination mills, absolutely … The indoctrination that is going on at the university level is a harm to our country.”
He claimed that “62 percent of kids who go into college with a faith commitment leave without it,” but declined to cite a source for the figure. And he floated the idea of requiring that universities that receive public funds have “intellectual diversity” on campus.
Criticized by his Republican rivals for supporting the Bush education law, which increased government-mandated testing in schools, Santorum has said he voted for it as “part of the (GOP) team.” He told Beck that as president, “I’ll be the team leader, not the team member.” Source I have never been so disgusted in my life. It is actually pathetic that Santorum is even being considered as a presidential candiate. This country has gone to shit. How can someone who spouts such garbage facts time and time again and never have a source, much less a reliable one, have so many followers.
Stop blaming the God damn politicians. They are simply basing what they say on what the polls tell them works with the voters. Blame your own fellow retarded average 'Christian mum and dad voters who care about the family marriage between one man and one woman'. Some economist could probably even come up with an argument that due to left-wing governments such as Clinton's administration creating a poorer middle-class, that more redneck Christians were created and that is why people like Santorum are able to get on the podium and appeal to their dumb asses.
|
(To clarify, I meant poorer and less educated redneck middle-class.)
|
I am not sure why... but even Santorum has managed to shoot himself in the foot... "'President Obama wants everybody in America to go to college, what a snob,' he said. 'There are good, decent men and women who work hard every day and put their skills to the test that aren’t taught by some liberal college professor. And trying to indoctrinate them.'"
(http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/25/santorum-obama-is-a-snob-who-wants-everybody-to-go-to-college/)
I can agree that a lot of skills necessary for a successful life are not taught in college or school in general, but saying that colleges are, essentially, platforms for "liberal college professor[s]" to "indoctrinate" people is way past the point and definitely going to cost him votes. Frankly, Obama just has to stay quiet and the Republicans might just lose the election without him lifting a finger.
|
It's also rather aggravating considering that we're lagging behind China and India in these technical fields (or I guess they're catching up, whatever). We want to be pushing our sciences further! That's what kept us in this superpower position this long!
Sigh...
|
On February 26 2012 12:38 ultimatenewb wrote: even Santorum has managed to shoot himself in the foot... .
What? He's shot himself in the foot so many times there probably aren't any toes left.
|
On February 26 2012 13:21 DoubleReed wrote: It's also rather aggravating considering that we're lagging behind China and India in these technical fields (or I guess they're catching up, whatever). We want to be pushing our sciences further! That's what kept us in this superpower position this long!
Sigh...
This country was born to die a certain way, much like any empire that just had its time in the sun and has to cede way. We were born to die when we ingrained so many rights and moralities within our founding ideals, and none better exemplifies these handicaps like China who simply mandates exhaustive hard science curriculum and ignores any moral imperatives in terms of human rights (whether it be labor, property, speech ect) for the sake of efficiency.
That's not to say China can hold up much longer in their deferring of rights much longer, eventually they'll have to lose quite a few wars in the future but you simply can't compete with a population of 1 billion that is exploited in nearly any way the government wishes. I'm sorry but were not going to catch up, but we will probably remain the preeminent counterbalance to rise of the East for quite some time.
|
On February 26 2012 14:14 forgottendreams wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 13:21 DoubleReed wrote: It's also rather aggravating considering that we're lagging behind China and India in these technical fields (or I guess they're catching up, whatever). We want to be pushing our sciences further! That's what kept us in this superpower position this long!
Sigh... This country was born to die a certain way, much like any empire that just had its time in the sun and has to cede way. We were born to die when we ingrained so many rights and moralities within our founding ideals, and none better exemplifies these handicaps like China who simply mandates exhaustive hard science curriculum and ignores any moral imperatives in terms of human rights (whether it be labor, property, speech ect) for the sake of efficiency. That's not to say China can hold up much longer in their deferring of rights much longer, eventually they'll have to lose quite a few wars in the future but you simply can't compete with a population of 1 billion that is exploited in nearly any way the government wishes. I'm sorry but were not going to catch up, but we will probably remain the preeminent counterbalance to rise of the East for quite some time.
I agree, very sensible post here. And I might ask(add?) for clarification that "losing some wars", you do mean on China´s homefront where people will eventually rise and demand similar freedoms and rights we fought so hard for in the western world. The other, very unpleasant alternative, would be that our politicians think that China is the model of the future... But I find that pretty unlikely, because even though a huge portion of people here(US/Europe) have gotten VERY complacent, this would not fly and there would be significant resistance. But thinking about Data Retention/SOPA/ACTA/Patriot Act/insertbullshitlawthatundermineseverythingtheweststandsfor... I tend to become a pessimistic cynic.
|
John Heilemann article from NY Mag.
On a biting, brittle mid-February morning 30 miles north of Detroit, Rick Santorum plants his flag in a patch of turf as politically fertile as exists in these United States. For three decades, Macomb County, Michigan, has been both a bellwether and a battleground, as its fabled Reagan Democrats first abandoned the party of Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, and Mike Dukakis, then gradually drifted back in support of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Barack Obama. Today in Macomb, the action is as much on the Republican as the Democratic side, with the county GOP riven by a split between mainstream and tea-party cadres. And yet in demographic terms, Macomb remains Macomb: overwhelmingly white and mostly non-college-educated, heavily Catholic and staunchly socially conservative, economically anti-globalist and culturally anti-swell.
All of which is to say that when Santorum takes the podium to address a Michigan Faith & Freedom Coalition rally in Shelby Charter Township, the 1,500 souls he sees before him are his kind of people—and soon enough he is speaking their language. To explain how America has always differed from other nations, Santorum invokes the Almighty: “We believe … we are children of a loving God.” To elucidate the evils of Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and cap-and-trade, he inveighs against liberal elites: “They want to control you, because like the kings of old, they believe they know better than you.” To highlight what’s at stake in 2012, he unfurls a grand (and entirely farkakte) historical flourish: “This decision will be starker than at any time since the election of 1860”—you know, the one featuring Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas on the eve of the Civil War.
Source
|
You gotta love(at least some) American politicians and Hollywood alike for their vast overabundance for the dramatic, makes for very entertaining end of days and hopefully a nice voter turnout as well x-D
|
ROFL @ santorum with his college comment. Are his advisors really stupid enough to think that that kind of position will win vs Obama?
|
On February 26 2012 16:09 synapse wrote: ROFL @ santorum with his college comment. Are his advisors really stupid enough to think that that kind of position will win vs Obama?
HAHAHAHA.
You don't know Amurica.
|
On February 26 2012 16:58 Sogo Otika wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 16:09 synapse wrote: ROFL @ santorum with his college comment. Are his advisors really stupid enough to think that that kind of position will win vs Obama? HAHAHAHA. You don't know Amurica. I live in the USA and I understand that there is a good portion of the population that sees liberal as == evil. Santorum's strategy seems like something that will be good for winning the nomination, but he will get SO MUCH shit for it in a competition with Obama. Even with the staggering amounts of social conservatives, promoting less higher education just will not fly.
|
|
|
|