Thursday, November 1, 2012

Obama; The Choice For Science

Credit: NOAA,  Sandy
In the wake of Sandy, with millions still without power the biggest storm of the year uncovered a surprising endorsement for President Obama.  Mayor Bloomberg has endorsed the president, mainly for three important reasons.

One believes a woman’s right to choose should be protected for future generations; one does not. That difference, given the likelihood of Supreme Court vacancies, weighs heavily on my decision.
One recognizes marriage equality as consistent with America’s march of freedom; one does not. I want our president to be on the right side of history.
One sees climate change as an urgent problem that threatens our planet; one does not. I want our president to place scientific evidence and risk management above electoral politics.
During the GOP's hurricane shortened convention, Mitt Romney delivered this epically lame line:
 President Obama promised to slow the rise of the oceans — [pauses for audience laughter(!)] — and to heal the planet.
 Scientific evidence and risk management are anathema to the republican party.  In  the face of world wide acceptance of man made global climate change the republican party stands alone, thumbing its nose at the evidence.  Recently,  US House Science, Space and Technology committee member Paul Broun (R-GA) summarized the republican party's relationship with science stating that embroyology, evolution and the big bang theory are all: "lies straight from the pit of hell". 

No comments:

Post a Comment