"[Obama] voted for nearly a billion dollars in pork barrel earmark projects, including, by the way, $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?"
MY friends, we spent $3 million of your money to study the DNA of bears in montana. Now, I don't know if that was a paternity issue or a criminal issue, (LAUGHTER)... but the point is, it was $3 million of your money. It was your money. And, you know, we laugh about it, but we cry - and we should cry because the Congress is supposed to be careful stewards of your tax dollars."
On Science Friday and in the Scientific American, the scientists speak out.
They insist that the [Bear DNA] study is not only worth every penny but that the $3-million price tag cited in the ad is, in a word, wrong.
In fact, Congress over the past five years has forked over a total of $4.8 million to study the genetic material of Montana's grizzly bears, according to Katherine Kendall, a research biologist at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
“This is not pork barrel at all,” says Richard Mace, a research biologist with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). “We have a federal law called the Endangered Species Act and [under this law] the federal government is supposed to help identify and conserve threatened species.”
The fact that he calls it a "$3 million dollar waste of money" instead of the higher price tag goes to show that he can't even do simple MATH to criticize a program. Not only that, but it's evident that this program IS a paternity issue. It's studying the ancestry of an endangered species! DUH.
On ScienceDebate2008, McCain replied to the top 14 pressing questions candidates should answer. Here's his take on science and education. Funny how his actions diverge from his words. Or maybe its just his words contradicting his other words. Hypocrisy!
- Eliminate wasteful earmarks in order to allocate funds for science and technology investments;
- Grow public understanding and popularity of mathematics and science by reforming mathematics and science education in schools;
- Basic research serves as the foundation for many new discoveries and represents a critical investment for the future of the country and the innovations that drive our economy and protect our people. I have supported significant increases in basic research at the National Science Foundation. I also called for a plan developed by our top scientists on how the funding should be utilized.
(edit: And apparently, I hate english. I corrected some of my glaring spelling and grammar errors. It's been a while since I've written anything in proper English! *shakes a mocking fist at 5am Medicine Notes*)
Palin chimes in with her bit.
"Where does a lot of that earmark money end up, anyway? [...] You've heard about, um, these -- some of these pet projects they really don't make a whole lot of sense, and sometimes these dollars they go to projects having little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not!"Wow. I'm sure that "fruit fly research" is EXACTLY the sort of waste-of-money earmarking that you think it is... and it has no impact on autism research.