The GOP’s war against science

I’ve been hesitant to post anything political here, but I couldn’t resist in this case as it does reflect the anti-intellectualism displayed during the current ‘regime’ and what we can most likely expect if they win the election next week.

This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just “people of faith” but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity. [Slate via Cosmic Variance]

And if you want to see what it would be like with Palin as President

Comments (2) Add yours ↓
  1. pokane

    It honestly scares me that someone like Palin is so close to the White House. I read somewhere that Palin’s success is much more telling of how far women have come in our country than the success of Hilary Clinton. This is because Palin has been able to achieve so much based solely on good looks and rhetoric, with no real substance; this is something only a man would have been able to do a few decades ago. I tend to agree with this statement

    30 October 2008
  2. awood

    I think that Palin’s so-called success is a disappointment to the country, let alone women. Women, and true feminists, should want to reach positions of power because they are qualified and have worked equally hard to get there. Choosing a woman as a VP that represents little more than an under-educated soccer mom only shows that the GOP does not understand women’s issues. Placing a woman on a pedestal and exaggerating her looks is a step backwards for those women who have made real strides for American equality. Hilary Clinton, love her or hate her, achieved real political power that had nothing to do with her physical appearance.

    30 October 2008

Your Comment