SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the just-make-sure-the-data-isn't-classified dept.
Common Dreams reports
Facing a presidential administration committed to waging war on Science, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) this week launched a website to help scientists blow the whistle on government interference in their work.
[...] The website encourages scientists employed by state and federal agencies to share "memos, emails, directives, or any other documents;" to send "datasets or other information that has been altered or removed from public view;" and adds: "You can also describe anything that has been communicated orally or even rumors that you have heard, and we will investigate."
The UCS urges potential whistleblowers to use encrypted communications, anonymous email, and the postal service to send materials, and encourages following the Electronic Frontier Foundation's advice for protecting privacy.
Related:
NASA's Earth Science Datasets and Others May be Disappearing From Public Access
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @11:06PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/316375-are-democrats-really-the-party-of-science [thehill.com]
Lots of people (many of them Democrats) think of the Democratic Party as the party of science, and, in fact, an overwhelming number of professional scientists do typically vote for Democrats. Still, there’s reason to believe that the question of which party is “the party of science” (assuming either party qualifies), has not been settled with finality.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:09AM
Still, there’s reason to believe that the question of which party is “the party of science” (assuming either party qualifies), has not been settled with finality.
Your "alternate science" about the "party of science" has been noted. But on the other hand, when the VP thinks the Universe is 6000 years old, and Tiny Trump https://www.reddit.com/r/TinyTrumps/ [reddit.com] is saying that "that was the information he was given", and rogue Opus Dei operatives are in the Republican National Security Council that cannot attract a sane person to head it, I think is is pretty finally settled which is not the party of science. Shame real science will have to go underground, again. Maybe I can become a booklegger!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by mhajicek on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:14AM
Neither party is "the party of science". Both are corrupt to the core and will do and say whatever they believe will get them ahead.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:12AM
Especially one of them.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday February 19 2017, @04:55PM
Yes, the "other one," of course, as we all know.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:27PM
Agreed, but the Republicans are currently the party of anti-science. The Democrats are no shining angels, but avoided blatant lies about scientific matters most of the time.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:21AM
While the Democrats are no paragons of virtue, truth, and honesty, the Republicans are definitely anti-science. Facts interfere with propaganda.
The Republicans have embraced propaganda and rejected countervailing facts. Further, they've done this on settled issues and unimportant issues, trying to stir up controversy where there is no basis or reason for controversy. Republicans politicians had largely accepted that Climate Change is real and a problem, until the nomination and then the presidency was won by a climate denier.
The Republicans neither know nor care where they're taking civilization. They comfort themselves with the notion that the world and God are benevolent and wouldn't guide civilization or humanity towards extinction. Individuals can walk off cliffs and fall to their deaths, because "thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God", but all humanity is in a safe, cosy universe that has no cliffs, or if it does, there is a God and He is benevolent and will guide us safely away from the cliff edge. With protection like that, why worry? Drill, baby, drill, God is with us!
One telling issue of the social conservatives is anti-abortionism. The plank has big problems apart from the hypocrisy of valuing unborn life higher than the lives of living people. It is certainly a convenient lever to keep women down. But even more that, the point of making as many babies as possible is two words: war machine. Boys are nothing more than fodder for the war machine. They reduce life to the mean basics of being nothing more than an unending struggle with rivals for food, mates, and space.
And that's where the Republican base will take us all if they can, even though they can't see or understand it themselves. Endless war. Cycles.
So that's the stupid in the Party of Stupid. The media is only too happy to hold up a megaphone to such nonsense. Moderate Republicans, the ones who actually have brains, have been drowned out and sidelined.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:51AM
And yet, the president won because he is anti-immigrant, and promised to make america great again by taking home the jobs... Or something like that.
So, the only thing the science loving loosers of the political battle would have had to give is what people actually want: a bit of racism and protectionism.
"You" can complain that the winner is a clown, and now he wreak havoc, but the "other" remind me of the childless couple in the beginning of the movie Idiocracy.
No matter how educated sensible they were, they died childless :D
Meybe next time, the democrats, or other "good" party, should put on some fake mustaches and throw some Hail:s into the air, and they maybe win.
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:09AM
The word doesn't mean what you think it means. The word is cheapened every time it is used incorrectly. I own a bunch of stuff. My closest three neighbors are all the same race as me. If my neighbors take my stuff, is it racist of me to call them theives, and to take them to court to get my stuff back, and to prevent them taking my stuff?
It is NOT racist to control who comes into your home. You might be racist if you put a sign on your property that says "No Mexicans", or "No Niggas" or something like that. That kind of crap is only dont to be hateful. But, you, the owner of your property, may exclude EVERYONE, any time you like. You may selectively allow some people to come on your property. It's not racism to do so.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:17AM
bro, it was sarcasm.
you should know me better by now than lecturing me on the meaning of the r-word...
but then, I guess you are sarcastic too...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:29AM
Alright - apologies.
I often respond to a comment, taking it at face value. I don't always look to see who I am responding to. So, the sarcasm was missed. Obviously, our positions are pretty close on this particular issue. ;^)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @06:53AM
Runaway! Hanging with the White brother! Nazi dude! Anti-semite! One of those people who is a little more anti-semite than the Donald, poor, tiny Donald. Runaway collaborating with the enemies of America! Fucking Nazis! Treason, I smell treason.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:17AM
As far as I can tell, Trump won because he was NOT Hillary.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @02:43AM
...and because USAians have the attention span of a gnat.
For example, letting the dude get away with calling an entire group of people criminals and rapists because he followed it with "and some, I assume, are good".
...then there's allowing him to get away with flip-flopping on minimum wage 3 times in 3 days. [motherjones.com]
It's clear that a USAian "hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest".
USAian public schools exist to produce compliant laborers, not critical thinkers.
Lamestream Media gets plenty of blame here as well.
We had the fake news story here a while back where the gal showed up, wrote down what the Reactionary gov't officials said, and took it back to her TeeVee station which aired/published it without any actual investigation.
Legacy media has become such crap.
Ronnie Raygun's decision to stop enforcing the Fairness Doctrine (and O'Bummer's scrubbing it from the books) signaled to them that actual reporting/analysis is optional.
...and USAians still consume their crap.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:46PM
Is it that Americans have the attention span of a gnat or that most people do not hang on every word coming from hyperventilating TV reporters, because they have better things to do?
There has arisen a conceit that those who do not buy into the media narrative are ignorant Philistines. To those who harbor that conceit i would counter that the "facts" used to construct that narrative are quite cherry-picked, and the narrative is purposeful, not objective or in any way "The TRUTH." If you believe it is, go and spend some time in a press department or major publication and think again.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @12:31AM
TV reporters
As stated, Lamestream Media is a DUBIOUS source of information.
As with anything where -profit- trumps all other considerations, they aren't really interesting in truth, just maximizing profits.
Similar deal with "public" broadcasting where they are hanging on by their fingernails because of Neoliberal/Reactionary funding cuts.
Those places have turned into just another source of corporate ads (even if they call those sponsorships/underwriting/whatever) and corporate propaganda.
Actual criticism of a gov't which might, on a whim, further cut their funding is not to be expected either.
The only broadcast model from which you should expect veracity is listener-funded/viewer-funded.
Americans [...] have better things to do
...like consume "reality" TeeVee.
major publication
If USAians would invest a tiny bit of effort into locating one or more New Media outlets which aren't concentrating their efforts on making profits to pay for incredibly expensive office space and fancy furnishings and such, those USAians could quite easily find a bunch whose mission is veracity.
Websites which monitor Lamestream Media and use multiple outlets as sources and CRITIQUE them when they go off the rails do supply a useful service and should be sought out.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 19 2017, @05:51PM
Ronnie Raygun's decision to stop enforcing the Fairness Doctrine (and O'Bummer's scrubbing it from the books) signaled to them that actual reporting/analysis is optional.
The Fairness Doctrine is a violation of the First Amendment. So there are legal and reasonable grounds for getting rid of it. I allow that this may have contributed to a decline in the quality of news reporting, but in addition to these legal issues, I don't think quality of US journalism is any business of the governments of the US. That responsibility is solely of the viewer/reader who as you noted is apparently just fine with this crap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:43PM
For-profit businesses do NOT have a right to the public airways.
In the past, that privilege was -EARNED- via a commitment to operate "in the public interest".
It's been decades since I have seen that commitment from for-profit broadcasters or from "public" broadcasters.
I haven't done TeeVee for 8 years and have never thought that cable was worth the price they were asking for it.
As such, I don't consume Free Speech TV, which I am given to believe is the rare example which DOES live up to that old standard.
I do consume Pacific Radio which I know lives up to the standard.
There's an open invitation to Reactionaries/Neoliberals to be guests.
They know that they won't get away with the nonsense they do on Lamestream Media so, of course, as a rule they don't participate.
Thom Hartmann sometimes gets a brave soul to appear.
As you might expect from one of the smartest guys on radio/TV, he shreds their obsolete/dumb notions easily.
Surprisingly, he occasionally agrees with a point made by one of the representatives of the Bourgeoisie.
THAT is the kind of thing that -used- to happen in media (e.g. William Buckley and Gore Vidal).
I don't think quality of US journalism is any business of the governments
I view your model as a path to Fascism.
I experience it daily when my "public" broadcasting Smooth Jazz station puts on their top of the hour "news" from the (Reactionary) Associated Press.
If I'm quick, I can change the station before I'm exposed to too much unchallenged Fascist propaganda.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 20 2017, @03:58PM
For-profit businesses do NOT have a right to the public airways. In the past, that privilege was -EARNED- via a commitment to operate "in the public interest".
The First Amendment doesn't make exceptions for privileges or the public interest.
I don't think quality of US journalism is any business of the governments
I view your model as a path to Fascism.
And I have the opposite viewpoint. Fairness Doctrine is just another means of government control of private business and thus, another pathway to fascism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:44AM
give is what people actually want: a bit of racism and protectionism.
"Oh, look, it's a Nazi, Mom! Can I punch him in the face?"
(Score: 2, Funny) by zugedneb on Sunday February 19 2017, @02:09AM
...if I take my own origin, and look at the history of my country, it is full with turmoil and blood.
Before WW1 and 2, that was the last nail in the coffin, ther was the enromous sacrifice it took to push back the turks...
And probably, the people who died protecting their land felt the same sorrow when "my" ancestors took it from them...
All those people who payed for their land with their crimes and their despair.
And then, today, it is all about the fucking jews who managed to get rich while countries got poor and bled out in these great conflicts...
And they dare to complain, when killed in nations they have barely contributed to defend or take...
For me, it would be the greatest honor in life to execute jews.
Wimmin, children, old people, young people - does not matter to me...
And the fucking people cheering for them, too...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:33PM
And then, today, it is all about the fucking jews who managed to get rich while countries got poor and bled out in these great conflicts...
Who are "the jews"? Why is there no distinction between the jews who "managed to get rich" and the many who managed to end up in a gas chamber instead? This is yet another situation where the many get blamed and punished for the vague, alleged actions of a few.
Look you can be as racist as you want to be. I don't care. But punishment for crime or other evils should be based on what that person actually did wrong, not their membership in an unpopular ethnic, social, or economic group.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Monday February 20 2017, @05:30AM
every entity with work related to domestic security and stability will agree with you.
not.
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 20 2017, @09:07AM
every entity with work related to domestic security and stability will agree with you.
Why did you add "not" to that? For example, if your security consists of profiling and banning people from a region like the Middle East, then it is rather easy for criminal and terrorist groups to come up with fake identities for places that you do allow people from (like the Americas). In other words, a system heavily dependent on profiling only effectively blocks the honest people who can't adapt to the profiling. To consider a very specific and successful example, El Al does some degree of racial profiling [haaretz.com] (which does appear to greatly aid their security situation), but doesn't rely on it. Instead they have a deep, multi-layered security system that involves among other things, interviews with each passenger going on a plane. Interviews would be far more likely to catch people who are attempting to bypass security with fake identities or countries of origin than merely having some profiling system.
Second, we're not speaking of risk, but of punishment. It simply is wrong to punish the whole for the crimes of a few. Blanket punishment also has a remarkable inability to actually target those who've allegedly done wrong. For example, the Rothschild family is frequently blamed for profiting from the First World War. Let's for the sake of argument take those accusations at face value.
So how many of the family died for these alleged crimes during the course of the Second World War? According to Wikipedia, only one [wikipedia.org] who married into the family and did a couple of things to draw a target on herself (participate in espionage and cross the wife of a powerful Nazi politician in Vichy France). Apparently, most saw the writing on the wall and ran for it well before the Nazis invaded their parts of the world. The rest paid ransoms to escape.
The poor jew of Poland didn't have anything to do with the military defeats of the First World War. Yet they did most of the dying [nationalww2museum.org].
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Monday February 20 2017, @12:39PM
the poor jews in poland can fuck themselves in the grave.
they survived for hundreds of year by adapting. sure, they are good at it.
but i say about them the same as i say about the so called victims of communism:
they had the education and mandatory military service, and so the means to fight back.
if u cant fight, die.
wtf is this love for "the little people"? dont get it.
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 20 2017, @04:24PM
they survived for hundreds of year by adapting. sure, they are good at it.
For 90% of Jews in Poland at the time of the Nazi invasion, they didn't adapt, they died. Who is good at surviving that sort of methodical extermination?
they had the education and mandatory military service, and so the means to fight back.
And? Is it ok to just take and destroy others because they don't fight back hard enough to stop you?
wtf is this love for "the little people"? dont get it.
Little people made the computer you typed on and maintained the complex infrastructure that connects you to the rest of the world. Little people make the food you eat. Little people made the world you live in often at the sacrifice of their own lives. The world as it is might not be that great, but it's not shit either.
Little people also make the strong people. The powers of the last century existed only because they had many little people to use. A Stalin or a Hitler would be nothing without the tens of millions of followers backing their whims once again often at great sacrifice to themselves.
Sure, it doesn't sound like you "love" or respect "little people" for doing all that. But respect is something you can learn.
Also, let us keep in mind that this whole thread was about punishment not mere fighting. What exactly is the point of being harmed by one person for their gain and then fighting/killing someone else completely unrelated? The first person has still profited by their actions and you've done nothing to discourage them from trying again.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Monday February 20 2017, @07:03PM
comon man... dont try to argue with me...
Hillary Clinton said in an interview: We Came, We Saw, He Died...
About Kadaffi i think...
I am just a simple ANN learning from adults in this world...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 20 2017, @08:06PM
I am just a simple ANN learning from adults in this world...
What makes them "adults"? The grotesque amorality of international politics really doesn't work at the human scale. And all these lessons of amoral or destructive power might make sense, if you're the next budding Genghis Khan and need some pro-tips to sharpen your game. But if you're just another nameless number, then you'll probably never have the power relevant for that lesson.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Tuesday February 21 2017, @08:27AM
time and time agains i tell people that the same rules applie to man, as animals.
when resourecs are abundant -> overpopulation.
when resources are scarce -> die, or kill.
that is why there is nothing wrong with ourging the jews or gipsys or whatever minority u happen to find annoying in your country. there is not enough for all.
i am just toying with you. just want to see how far this sensible and mature way of reasoning actually takes you from the thruth.
by the way, it is not the little people that makes the computer i use, as you put it some time age.
in a lot of engineers, the curse that makes a soldier is present in them too.
the mechanism that unlinks the self from the mind so that you can sink into a problem soo deep that yyou forget hunger, the self, and emotions dont disturb you.
these type of prople are called "agents" and "units", not "little people".
tired of talkig to you. you just do not represent enought of history and reallity. probably you are a good parent and a good friend, but also an idiot.
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 21 2017, @08:47AM
time and time agains i tell people that the same rules applie to man, as animals. when resourecs are abundant -> overpopulation. when resources are scarce -> die, or kill.
Yet in the developed world, with the highest abundance of resources, we have negative population growth among second or further generation residents. The rules aren't applying.
(Score: 1) by zugedneb on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:28AM
yes, indeed...
but these times are more like the end of history, where we reach the technology to modify ourselves, and leave it all, for whatever is to come.
you can not call these times a "typical slice", yes?
now, that the wimmin are free, and do what they want, and the man have anime and waifus, there is no more need for physical comfort of others, so maybe not as many situations lead to sex and impregnation, yes?
or other things are true?
people seem fight for religions, but also seem to believe less. maybe they really see, that is is frightening to make children? difficult to raise and lot of responsibility?
there are no more norms that require core families, and no more gods to believe in...
then, there is agent Smith. a man of pure mind and understanding, but little heart.
the white race has changed, others i do not know that much about.
anyways, there are more aspects of this than a simple troll like can list...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:00AM
"The Republicans neither know nor care where they're taking civilization."
Let's correct that statement, try to make it more accurate.
"Neither major US political party has any clue where they are taking civilization - all that matters to either of them is POWER!"
Now, if you want to concentrate on the "where they're taking civilization", well, the fact is that conservatism has a much better idea where they are going. They don't want to go anywhere far, or anywhere fast. Conservatives see safety in the old tried and true methods. But, the problem here is, republican is no longer synonymous with conservative. There are still a lot of conservatives in the party, but the party is no longer conservative.
Progressives, on the other hand, have little idea where they are going, they only know that they don't like the status quo. "Hope and change" appealed to anyone and everyone who doesn't like the status quo. Obama's campaign capitalized on the fact that few people really like where we are today, "hope and change" appealed to a lot of people who aren't progressive at all. The democrats have one HELL of a lot of progressives in their party. Those progressives over ride the more sensible democrats. Progressives have hijacked the democratic party, no less than neocons hijacked the republican party.
No one has a map to the future, after all. Personally, I think that the republicans would take us to one hell, if left unopposed, while the democrats would just take us to a different hell if no one opposes them.
And, once again, I'll state that we need more parties, more varied visions for the future, and a lot more opposition to the two major parties.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:35AM
The sooner that everyone realizes that their choices are NOT binary, the better off we'll all be.
To make that truly meaningful will require that all election campaigns for public office be publicly funded.
This will require an amendment to the Constitution.
Anyone who isn't working on that is part of the problem.
It will also require that the courts declare the Commission on Presidential Debates, an operation which excludes all but the Reds and Blues, to be an anti-competitive racket and break it up.
.
...and cmn32480 has suddenly developed an extreme aversion to #FragmentIdentifiers in URLs. [soylentnews.org]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:37PM
To make that truly meaningful will require that all election campaigns for public office be publicly funded.
That already locks out third parties who haven't been able to muster the thresholds required to get public funding.
This will require an amendment to the Constitution. Anyone who isn't working on that is part of the problem.
Because you ignore how public funding already works to enforce the two party state.
It will also require that the courts declare the Commission on Presidential Debates, an operation which excludes all but the Reds and Blues, to be an anti-competitive racket and break it up.
You merely see the future of your policy here.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:39AM
Yes indeed, let's try to be accurate. I disagree with the assertion that both parties are the same, empty of all drive other than the lust for power.
A problem with the idea of conservatives being those who wish to maintain the status quo or make changes slowly, is that it is an illusion. We haven't done any such thing. We've dived right in. Nearly everyone the world over has rapidly adopted the latest and greatest our technologies have to offer. Those who aren't that enthusiastic about it feel strong pressure to adopt enough new things to stay competitive. What then does conservative mean now? Does that mean we keep on driving oil powered cars and burning coal for power? That state of affairs has existed for a very brief time. Just 200 years ago there were no automobiles, no power plants, no electrified homes, no electric utilities, no electric street lamps, no electric anything. We had steam power, and even that wasn't more than 100 years old. So called conservatives who worship Big Oil and jump to man the barricades when they cry that the Global Warming alarmists are coming, aren't being conservative at all.
I also see overwrought claims of an inability to discover knowledge, a common position of the Know Nothing kind of Republican. No one can know the future, say you? We can actually project and predict many things. For instance, we sure as heck are able to figure out how long an itinerary is likely to take, whether by land or sea or both. We can check vehicles beforehand and determine whether they are likely to delay us with a breakdown. We can also predict CO2 levels and make educated guesses and more than that about what that will do to the environment. Another example of incorrect Know Nothing assertions is the notion that no one really knows how old the Earth is. Wrong. We do have a very good idea that the Earth is 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old, and this figure is not based on made up nonsense, no, we have all kinds of solid evidence. We know how quickly the sun burns (fuses, actually, if you want to be pedantic) hydrogen, and its present composition, and can easily project its age based on that, and also its future, very similar to knowing how long a wood fire or candle has been burning and how much longer it will continue to burn. We know how long pretty much every long lived but still unstable radioactive isotope lasts, and can compute how much of each should be present if the Earth is indeed the age we think it is. It all matches.
For still another example, we know how effective walls are and are not. The Berlin Wall was a loser move to force people to stay. It and the entire Iron Curtain was an admission that Communism did not have popular support. It was not too effective at stopping determined people from crossing, and in some of the cases where it did work, the side effects from negative publicity were so severe it wasn't worth it. The Maginot Line was an abysmal failure that was easily bypassed at the start of WWII. Listen to WWII General Patton: "Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man." We ought to realize a wall along a 2000 mile long border is ridiculous and doomed to failure. You don't need to be a genius to predict that the wall won't work. The way to secure the border with Mexico is first to stop thinking of it as a security problem. It's a political problem, and the best solution is to help Mexico so that their citizens aren't desperate to escape crushing poverty. Instead, we have a clown as POTUS who has said that Mexicans are all drug dealers, criminals, and rapists.
The Republicans have reworked themselves to attract the kind of voter who sees religion and science as opposed, and puts their personal and not too good interpretation of religion first, even when doing so is clearly wrong and harms everyone, including themselves. Despite the folly of it, Republicans have deliberately attracted these ignoramuses and forged them into a political force. That's the Southern Strategy. Trump is hardly alone among Republicans when he says he loves stupid voters. One of the stupidest things these bozos really want to do is the Clash of Civilizations. They really want to be Neo-Crusaders, marching across the old world through the Holy Land and kicking out and killing off all the Muslims. Perhaps the biggest folly is the likes of Big Oil seeking to use this desire to secure more cheap oil for them to monopolize. They're playing with fire and have burnt themselves repeatedly, but they just can't stop themselves. Better if the Republicans had left such fools and their crazy ideas disorganized and weak.
(Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Sunday February 19 2017, @02:32AM
Whole story sounds like Fake News if you ask me.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/firestorm-over-supposed-gag-order-agricultural-scientists-was-self-inflicted-wound [sciencemag.org]
http://dailysignal.com/2016/10/11/obama-is-restarting-the-mars-program-he-canceled-8-years-ago/ [dailysignal.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.