According to my boyfriend, this planetarium and museum is supposed to be the largest of its kind in the country or something. It's a big deal to science. He says there was all kinds of chatter online after the first debate in which it was mentioned...scientists all over were pissed.

ETA: Adler is the oldest planetarium in the country.

here's some more on the so-called "overhead projector"
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/222859.php
http://cbs13.com/campaign08/obama.mc....2.836336.html
http://gizmodo.com/5060946/barack-ob...ly-pretty-cool
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archi...8/1518907.aspx (has links to a bunch of other sites that think McCain's statement sucks, too)

ETA some more: for those of you who don't think this museum and research institution benefits our country, and therefore doesn't deserve federal funding, I'd like to hear why you think the federal govt. should keep supplying nearly $40 billion of our tax money to YOUR schools every year. We do these things because an educated society is a strong society.

I don't think the federal government should be in education. They only provide 20% of funding - and get in the way. I am perfectly confident in the ability of states to handle education.

So do I get to criticize the funding? :)

I live in Chicago, and I grew up with the Adler Planetarium "in my backyard." When you live in a big city, you take things for granted. It is one of my favorite places. I was under the impression that the Zeiss projector is very old and has needed to be replaced for awhile (10+ years, perhaps). Coming up with the funds has never been easy. The money should come from somewhere within Chicago or private contributors. I believe that passing the replacement cost onto a federal government that is already in the midst of a federal mortgage bailout, a possible stock market crash, and on the verge of a recession is irresponsible. I love science. I love education. But let the big guys that have the money pay for this. The United States government should not be held responsible for having to spend federal funds for such a private purpose. Sure Obama wants it. It will keep everybody in Chicago happy. But I have to agree with McCain on this one.

As I already pointed out, Congress did not approve the funds, even though the amount is so small that if I sold all my assets I could personally pay for it myself. This thread is about the debate, and in my opinion McCain's comments misled the public, and the fact that he used Obama's support of the planetarium as a means of derision demonstrates his lack of interest in the sciences as a whole.

Can't districts/schools opt out of receiving federal funds? I seem to recall my high school being threatened years ago that they'd have any federal grants/funding revoked if they didn't allow military recruiters on campus. The district was contemplating it.

Since when does 'no $$$$$' (that's BIG bucks, btw) equal 'I don't give a rat's ass about science'? I think it's great that Obama had finally tried to do something constructive while in office, but too bad it didn't go through. Do you think that maybe the people that rejected his proposal might have thought there were more worthwhile items to spend the money on?

Hmmm . . .would they then no longer be under federal regulation i.e. No Child Left Behind?

In theory, perhaps. Practically speaking, I seriously doubt it.

Isn't the real incentive (for schools anyway) for NCLB funding? Anyhow, my former district's high schools aren't on the NCLB watch list anyway. And if I recall, this happened before NCLB was implemented.

Well, I don't really think k-12 education should be federally funded, and I think college and university funding should be strictly tied to some national goals.

The only k-12 school funding that makes sense to me is when military bases put a big burden on the local schools without really paying into the property tax base. (And I think that the free and reduced price lunch program is probably as especially effective way to make sure kids in need get fed.)

About the planetarium, it's not that we shouldn't fund it; it's just a question of who should pay. (Three million is a figure that could be handled in a state budget. The Illinois state budget was apparently about 65 Billion for 2008 http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/pu...nor/budget.pdf) It doesn't make sense to me, unless there's some original research involved (which probably isn't related to the projector honestly, even if there is some going on at the facility), to fund a city or state planetarium with federal funds, particularly if it was an earmark stuck on to a different bill rather than something that was debated on its merits.

Exactly - Jono, you're making quite a logical leap.

Dude it's a planetarium. To paraphrase a smarter man than me, how many kids have textbooks that refer to the civil rights movement as "Trouble Ahead", and we're using a planetarium as an example of support for the sciences? Jesus - I worked in a tier-1 gene therapy lab and spent 55% of my time digging for grants. This is nonsense, no matter what Jono wants to use as his angle.

Sorry, but I didn't think I had an angle. I was just explaining how the debate changed my opinion of both candidates.

People may want to check out the Obama tax cut calculator on his website.

According to the calculator, under his plan my tax cut would be:

$1225
McCain tax savings
$150

Plus, under Obama, you may be eligible for

* 50% tax credit for up to $1000 for retirement savings