The Last Presidential Debate 10.15.08 @ 9PM

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

It did, but IMHO (and the opinions of quite a few others I've heard comment on it), Obama's smiles and laughs came across differently.

Again, bearing in mind what I said earlier -- that we may have reached the point where we were all seeing the debate through the lens of the opinions we've already formed -- Obama's smiles and laughs, in the contezxt of his general appearance as cool and controlled, typically came across as "that's just so silly or so off that it's not worth responding to," while McCain's came across as angry or (in the words of one of my co-workers) "deranged."

Granted, these are all subjective perceptions, but that's what a lot of it is about now. The snap polls, at least, seem to indicate that, while McCain did his best debate job yet, the debate did not help improve his perception among the voters he needs to reach.

Yeah, I agree with your interpretation of how people are seeing the debate. I was reading right leaning coverage, and it referred to Obama's smug smirk.

[JonoBN41]

It was a great debate that finally made up my mind who to vote for. For the second time in as many debates, McCain brought up the 3 million Obama voted in favor of for an "overhead projector" for a planetarium - which BTW was never approved. Since I have a telescope housed in my own observatory I looked it up, and it's a the Adler Planetarium in Chicago. Their old star projector - it's about the size of a small car - is old and no longer supported by Zeiss, the manufacturer, and they need a new one. It will cost 10 million, seven of which will be raised privately.

The media did not pick up on this, I suppose, because science just doesn't stimulate the public. But it's what put us on the moon, put satellites into orbit for weather, communications, and national security, and gave us views from the Hubble that will unlock the secrets of the universe. Many people are first inspired by a visit to a planetarium, and go on to dedicate themselves to life in science. The public needs more exposure to it, not less.

McCain doesn't see the value in it, and uses it against Obama as nothing more than wasteful pork barrel spending. If that's his attitude, then I'm voting for Obama. It's time we had someone who's well educated in the White House, and someone who appreciates the value of education.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by JonoBN41

It was a great debate that finally made up my mind who to vote for. For the second time in as many debates, McCain brought up the 3 million Obama voted in favor of for an "overhead projector" for a planetarium - which BTW was never approved. Since I have a telescope housed in my own observatory I looked it up, and it's a the Adler Planetarium in Chicago. Their old star projector - it's about the size of a small car - is old and no longer supported by Zeiss, the manufacturer, and they need a new one. It will cost 10 million, seven of which will be raised privately.

The media did not pick up on this, I suppose, because science just doesn't stimulate the public. But it's what put us on the moon, put satellites into orbit for weather, communications, and national security, and gave us views from the Hubble that will unlock the secrets of the universe. Many people are first inspired by a visit to a planetarium, and go on to dedicate themselves to life in science. The public needs more exposure to it, not less.

McCain doesn't see the value in it, and uses it against Obama as nothing more than wasteful pork barrel spending. If that's his attitude, then I'm voting for Obama. It's time we had someone who's well educated in the White House, and someone who appreciates the value of education.

Some science obviously should be funded at that national level, but it's hard to see why this particular item, while worthy of being paid for at some level, needs to be paid for at the Federal level.

[JonoBN41]

My point was that McCain called it an "overhead projector", like you'd place a book on to show the class in high school. He wanted us to think it was absurdly wasteful, like the million dollar toilet seat for a C5. In effect, he lied.

So in this case McCains' mudslinging backfired, and he convinced me to vote for the other candidate.

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by JonoBN41

My point was that McCain called it an "overhead projector", like you'd place a book on to show the class in high school. He wanted us to think it was absurdly wasteful, like the million dollar toilet seat for a C5. In effect, he lied.

So in this case McCains' mudslinging backfired, and he convinced me to vote for the other candidate.

Technically it's an accurate description. It projects things overhead. Just sayin'.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Some science obviously should be funded at that national level, but it's hard to see why this particular item, while worthy of being paid for at some level, needs to be paid for at the Federal level.

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.

[SWTXBelle]

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?

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

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?

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.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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.

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

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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.

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

[barbino]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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 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.

[JonoBN41]

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.

[ajuhdg]

Originally Posted by JonoBN41

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.

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?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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.

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.