|
Re: Republicans on science |
I believe that Huntman's remarks were merely posturing. He's low in the polls - single digits. He's saying whatever it takes for 30-second sound bytes that will make the nightly news - statements that will highlight the differences between him and the frontrunner, Perry, who made comments regarding evolution and climate change. Heck, Huntsman even spoke Mandarin in one interview to display the fact that he is more equipped to deal with the Chinese than the other candidates. I would pay less attention to Perry's or Huntsman's remarks regarding science than I would to the real problems that face us - this economy, jobs, and the dismal housing market. I personally know that of which I speak. I was laid off from my job of 5 years due to the economic downturn - position eliminated due to cutbacks. I have yet to find another position in my field after 6 months of unemployment. And I live in Las Vegas, the epicenter of the housing disaster - down 50%. In 2008, the American people voted into office the most liberal, most unqualified, most ineffctual President in history and they are now beginning to realize that. In return, they are now ready to swing in the exact opposite direction to the other extreme. I'm not saying this is right or wrong. I'm just saying this is the consequence of 3 years of this administration. They voted for a man who, five days before the election, stated that "we are five days away from fundamentally transforming this nation." He took a swing at people who cling to their guns and religion. He has stated that he believes in income redistribution. And he pushed through Obamacare, even though the majority of American paople are against it. Hence, the majority of people are now waking up to the socialistic path that we are headed down and want to turn this nation back in the other direction: capitalism, less government and personal responsibility. So, if a presidential candidate makes remarks about science - especially science issues that can be argued either way, like man-made climate change that even some climatologists disagree on - then that matters little compared to the political issues that matter most: economy and jobs. Therefore, stances on science issues are far down on my list of criteria for picking a presidential candidate. Barbara Follow Ups: ● Re: Republicans on science - EQF 20:08:08 - 8/31/2011 (79132) (1) ● Re: Republicans on science - Barbara 21:19:39 - 8/31/2011 (79133) (2) ● emasculated military!? - John Vidale 10:59:55 - 9/1/2011 (79137) (2) ● Re: emasculated military!? - Barbara 12:20:00 - 9/1/2011 (79141) (1) ● Re: emasculated military!? - John Vidale 12:58:07 - 9/1/2011 (79142) (1) ● Re: emasculated military!? - Barbara 13:28:46 - 9/1/2011 (79143) (1) ● accounting - John Vidale 14:27:26 - 9/1/2011 (79144) (1) ● Re: accounting- in defense of defense.. - Canie 14:55:36 - 9/1/2011 (79145) (1) ● not exactly - John Vidale 15:11:00 - 9/1/2011 (79149) (1) ● a little more - John Vidale 15:20:40 - 9/1/2011 (79151) (0) ● a solution - John Vidale 11:32:35 - 9/1/2011 (79140) (0) ● Re: Republicans on science - heartland chris 05:44:44 - 9/1/2011 (79134) (1) ● Re: Republicans on science - Barbara 10:10:04 - 9/1/2011 (79136) (1) ● budgets/taxes - heartland chris 15:17:20 - 9/1/2011 (79150) (1) ● source - Barbara 15:24:46 - 9/1/2011 (79153) (0) |
|