So a little while back, John McCain made an ill-advised crack about planetaria (that’s the plural of planetarium), calling them "foolishness". It was ill advised because it raised the hackles of lots of science-loving folks, including those who want to — gasp, horror! — educate kids about astronomy and science.
At the time I suspected it was just a wedge in which to attack Barack Obama, but his use of the word foolishness really caught my attention. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, but does he really dislike such things?
Well, last night removed any doubt, when McCain — twice — used Obama’s requested earmark of three million dollars for Adler planetarium as a bludgeon, trying to pin Obama as another pork-barrel politician. He disdainfully said the money was for an "overhead projector". Those are his exact words. Here’s what he said:
While we were working to eliminate these pork barrel earmarks he [Senator Obama, or "that one"] voted for nearly $1 billion in pork barrel earmark projects. Including $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?
Well, shock of shocks — it turns out McCain’s characterization of this was all wrong. In fact, I would call it a lie. He knows it wasn’t for an overhead projector, a piece of classroom equipment that costs a couple of hundred dollars. That money was for Adler’s Zeiss Mark VI star projector: a venerable piece of precision fabricated equipment that projects the stars, constellations, and other objects inside the planetarium dome. Adler’s Zeiss is 40 years old, and desperately needs replacing. These machines are pricey, and replacing them difficult.
Adler needed money to do this. They asked local politicians, and eventually were able to get a request in a budget submitted by Obama. However, Obama never even voted on that budget, and Adler never got that money — thus making, again, McCain a liar.
Needless to say, Adler wasn’t thrilled with this characterization of their beloved Zeiss. They issued a statement to that effect. You can also get opinions all over the place: Universe Today, SpaceWriter, Davin Flateau, Discovery Space, Wonkette, the Chicago Tribune, even NPR.
I have posted about this before (just last night, in fact). The comments on my statements have been all over the place, from support to some fairly ridiculous complaints. My favorites have involved something along the line of, "Where in the Constitution does it say the federal government has to send money to planetaria?"
Good question. But where does it say the government will repair roads, provide clean water, create public schools, fund the space program?
Look: there are some things the government does for the greater good. This is where libertarians and I part company. Government isn’t always bad. In many cases, it takes the money it gets in taxes and does fantastic things with it, like sending probes to Mercury and funding autism research. It makes the roads drivable, and makes sure companies don’t pollute our air (well, it used to do that). You can complain all you want that earmarks get abused — and they certainly do — but they also get used to fund projects that are starved for cash, and that richly deserve to have life breathed into them.
I disagree with McCain here as well. He wants no earmarks at all. I think that’s ridiculous. It would be far better to have regulation of them, instead of the laissez-faire attitude the government has now. Or, if not overt regulation, some sort of throttle on them, instead of them being free passes to bridges to nowhere.
And finally, I want to reiterate what I said in my first post on this topic: I love planetaria. Love love love. They educate kids. That is among the finest and most honorable goals anyone can have. People who work at planetaria across the country and the world do it because they love it. They don’t get rich doing it, they don’t get fame doing it, they hardly even get accolades doing it. But we owe so much to them! Kids learn in planetaria– and not just about the stars over their heads on a given night; planetaria are evolving into the digital age, bringing incredible programs to the public (I know what I’m talking about here). And it’s not even just astronomy. The projectors can give all kinds of lessons: biology, history, local lore… anything you can create digitally can be projected in a planetarium, and kids can learn.
For McCain to use this as a political zinger is insulting, and for him to call it foolishness is beyond the pale. The honorable thing for him to do now is to admit he was wrong, admit he mischaracterized both the planetarium and Obama’s stance, and then issue a public apology to planetarians and science-lovers across the country.
The next debate is in one week. I bet a lot more pro-science folks will be watching, too. Closely.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
This should really be getting some media play, if not via the media actually [i]doing its job[/i] then at least by the Obama campaign. McCain essentially got up in front of a national audience and declared that spending on science education was wasteful foolishness. That’s… incomprehensible.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Sigh,
I noticed that one too Phil. Me and Swoopy both tried hard not to yell something bad at the TV while my wife was reading.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
As a frequent visitor to the Ward Beecher Planetarium on the campus of Youngstown State University in Youngstown OH, I was appalled at McCain’s terminology of a star projector as an “overhead” projector. Ward Beecher Planetarium replaced it’s 1960’s era star projector two years ago with a new Chronos star projector. Along with a total remodeling of the planetarium it is a miraculous difference. If I had been an undecided voter, this would have sealed the deal for me. Obama would be my candidate. I’m 55 years old and a late comer to the Planetarium experience. I learn something new every weekend about our universe. Heck, just knowing which stars are where is amazing to me. Three years ago the only Sirius I knew was a satellite radio company. Now I check out the brightest star in the sky every night with my binoculars. Shame on you, John McCain.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Where is the outrage over Obama’s support of Surbanes-Oxeley which has been destructive to the capital markets that fund all the private science innovation? What about tax rate policy and the effect it has on investment in the private sector?
Why is it only anti-science when it’s about the government funding or not funding something other than taking a broad look at how one’s policies will effect all science?
I guess it’s much easier to just focus on one narrow project and conflate, instead of doing the research. Kind of like, oh, I dunno, what McCain and Obama did last night.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
If there is 700 billon to bail out the banks 3 millions is change in comparison. Don’t complain about funding for bridges, there is still their half bridge between New Brunswick and Maine they have to build.(I know the bridge that you are commenting on is in Alaska.)
October 8th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Also why I split from some libertarians.. There needs to be a party that is a mixture of democrat and libertarian. Because both of them lean too far, one regulates too much and the other doesn’t regulate at all. Just I like them both socially, but economicaly, they both suck. It is hard to decide, this is why it is hard for me to vote, sir.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
How is it that someone like McCain manages to get such a following in the first place? I’m not a US citizen, or even a resident, but I find many people around me watching this and the concern for the world should he be voted in isn’t insignificant.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
I’d have gone in to science anyhow, and as it turned out not to be astronomy that I (normally) get paid for, I suppose my own little universe would have survived the Adler Planetarium having been McCain’ed. But the reality is that I did go, with school groups, with friend, solo, and, as I got older, with my daughter, to the Adler Planetarium. Repeat also for Aquaria, musea, and so on.
I don’t think we need more scientists, but we absolutely need more people who know about science, including what it can and can’t do. Planetaria, et al., are excellent things for that. Calling planetaria foolishness, well, that sends me a strong signal of where science and scientists would stand in his administration.
October 8th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Whether or not a planetarium is a good thing to have around is a completely different question from whether the federal government should be spending money on it. It shouldn’t. Let the state or city handle it — or even better, let the place operate as a business and get its capital expenditures from its own profits.
And the argument that we’re already spending hundreds of billions of dollars on even more worthless projects doesn’t cut it — that’s like the 500 pound man saying, “What’s one more twinky?”
October 8th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
McCain is right — science and education are stupid! Science claims that heavier-than-air objects can be made to fly. No one is more aware than Maverick how dangerously ridiculous that is. Sure, they can be made to work, but when those infernal flying contraptions chose to fall out of the sky 1) the ground can hurt you and, 2) they can put you right into the waiting arms of people from “nations that don’t like us too much”.
Sorry kiddies, Science just isn’t worth the risk. Go watch TV.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
IMO we need to do away with (political) parties altogether — but I digress. I wonder if McCain has never been to a planetarium? Maybe he truly is ignorant.
Can anyone forget the sense of awe they felt the first time they sat down in a planetarium and the lights faded out and they found themselves sitting in the middle of a perfect, vivid star-filled night sky? Few things will open up the mind for learning like that experience. Perhaps nothing.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I agree with you completely, Phil. I had the exact same sentiments when watching this. If a planetarium projector for Alder is the worst “pork” that Obama’s pushed, then I say we give him complete control over the federal budget until the end of time. I’ve wasted far larger portions of my own personal budget on much worse things annually.
I was watching the debate on CNN and was happy to see that the independents watching the debate didn’t give McCain any love at all for his planetarium comments. It gives me a little more faith in my fellow Americans.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
You give McCain too much credit. What makes you think he knows the difference between a Zeiss projector and an overhead projector?
October 8th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
This statement and his continued complaint about a bear study in Montana show that he is appealing to ignorance in his campaign.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Libertarians? Someone needs to be as frank about the far right and the libertarians as they themselves are (but more erroneously, IMO) about the far left: what we’re really talking about are the “social darwinists” vs. the “socialists”.
And I’m on the left (but moderately) because I find it hard to be comfortable while others are caught in cycle of poverty and poor education. But, hey, that’s just me. I happen to think that Michelle Obama is right: some Americans ARE “mean.” Libertarians and neocons are two good examples.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
@Robert Grumbine, why don’t we need more scientists? Or at least desire them?
I think we would be far better off as a society if we took just 10% of our collective entertainment budgets and diverted the funds to science. This is just a wild guess, but I’m guessing that would about double our science resources, which in turn would accelerate the growth of our knowledge of reality.
Perhaps we would be more enlightened about energy generation and/or usage by now. Or be able to effectively prevent or treat common types of cancer. Or, perhaps most unlikely but certainly most important, have a population that knows and cares as much about general science as they do about Britney’s last visit to rehab.
Who knows how much more knowledge we might have had we started doing this 50 years ago?
October 8th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Is a Zeiss still the most cost-effective way of projecting stars on a domed ceiling here in the 21st century?
October 8th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Sean O’Hara,
Most of the technology you use in your life is a direct or indirect result of investment by federal government…so either stop using it, or stop whining about it. Anything else is hypocritical.
Oversight is good…Libertarian dogma is nonsense.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Some institutions–notably those devoted to public education–cannot simply “operate as a business” and pay for themselves. Included among these are museums, libraries, and, yes, planetaria. I spent many hours in my youth at the Fels Planetarium in Philadelphia–as well as at the many science and art museums and the fabulous public library nearby. Not all of these were free, but admission fees were kept low, and as a result we curious kids could frequent them and learn so much more than we did through school alone. I’m sure some fee-based income, and some local, perhaps even state, funding was involved, but the federal government takes the biggest share of our incomes and therefore has the largest amount of money to spend on worthwhile educational programs. And these programs can contribute to those curious kids excelling in school and in careers that, in turn, generate more tax dollars to promote science education for future generations.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
@Rabor
Am I missing something here? Are we talking about the anti-corruption Sarbanes-Oxley Act which McCain voted for 2 years before Obama was in the senate?
October 8th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
A) Libertarians are not even remotely tantamount to the “far right.”
B) You are right, though not in the way you mean — the equation of libertarianism with Social Darwinism is as grossly ignorant as the equation of liberals with socialists.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
As they say on Wikipedia, CITATION NEEDED.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Phil, we’re on the same wavelength here. I thought about going into the same territory, but my own blog posts were getting lengthy enough as it was!
Lab lemming: Zeiss is still a good way to show stars, and coupled with a fulldome video system, you can do amazing things.
You can be as plain or fancy with your fulldome technology as your budget and facility allows — and I’ve seen all kinds of combinations of technology in theaters.
Bottom line is that planetarium/science center facilities are among the “good” things that our tax dollars go for, and in the world of the “commons” they are priceless.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Obama opened this purchase up to justified criticism by making it an earmark. That means it skipped the normal vetting process that is used for legitimate government spending.
Had Obama used the correct appropriations procedures then there would be no criticism. But that would mean showing up for work, something Obama rarely does.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Sean, the spin offs from the space program alone would cover pages. Educate yourself…it’s more difficult than spouting dogma, but much more rewarding.
I would start with Robert Heinlein’s article “Spinoff.” Dated, but very enlightening.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I watched the debate and I had to cringe when McCain said overhead projector.
And he said “overhead projector” twice! Incredible, really!
I really have to wonder whether that man is just outright stupid or a bold liar, or both.
On a sidenote, did anyone notice that this man is moving like a robot? Is that the updated Cheney model, or the predecessor? He definitely looks like older tech…
Sorry could not resist.
Am I the only one that would have wished a different answer to the last question from both candidates?
I would have loved something along the lines of “if I dont know something I will go and ask scientists that are experts in their field”. Either this is not what politicians have to say, or really neither of them thinks that way (that would be kinda scary though).
October 8th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
But where does it say the government will repair roads, provide clean water, create public schools, fund the space program?
To be fair they said federal government, that doesn’t forbid local or state government from providing water, schools, or roads. Most of that should and is paid locally or at state level anyway. Government isn’t bad, the idea of local and state governments paying over federal government on most expenses is that it allows for my direct control and accountability to the local taxpayers who benefit from these things. So the idea is to have the federal government small so it can be more easily accountable and less likely to devolve into a tyranny, while having local and state do the rest when it comes to the people’s needs. However I do concede there are certain projects the feds are needed for such as interstate commerce (this is where expressways and US highways come in), defense, and so on.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Don’t hold your breath waiting for an apology… My money says he’ll repeat it again.
I’m from Arizona and I’ve voted for him for Senate, but I won’t vote for him for president. He’s not the same man. As we get closer to the election I expect that Mr. McCain’s “Statesman Index” - the ratio of (statements of fact + constructive positions) to (statements of non-facts + pandering + demagoguery) will decline significantly. He’s desperate and it shows.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Jim Howard says:
“Obama opened this purchase up to justified criticism by making it an earmark. That means it skipped the normal vetting process that is used for legitimate government spending.
Had Obama used the correct appropriations procedures then there would be no criticism. But that would mean showing up for work, something Obama rarely does.”
But, the purchase wasn’t made with federal dollars. And, if you’re going to go down that road, then please start checking the purchases McCain has made using federal dollars. And McCain hasn’t “been to work” for the better part of a year, except to parachute in for highly publicized things like “suspending his campaign” to “help” the economic crisis.
If you are going to criticize Obama for using the same procedure that every other member of the senate and house uses to get funding, then you’d better be prepared to critique every other member’s requests.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
The “overhead projector” crack got my goat, too.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
“Whether or not a planetarium is a good thing to have around is a completely different question from whether the federal government should be spending money on it. It shouldn’t. Let the state or city handle it — or even better, let the place operate as a business and get its capital expenditures from its own profits.”
Privately operated planetariums, by their very nature, are less accessible to the people that most need access to them. Since they must turn a profit they have to charge, be it individuals or school groups, and as a result those people and children who have the least access to good educational resources (the poor) are once again denied access to education.
As to the state or city funding them, that’s lovely but they’re quite expensive and it’s not as though this isn’t a matter of national importance. It’s in the public interest to have well educated kids, who grow up to be well educated adults. The libertarian position is that government should stay out of everything but national defense. I would argue that government’s function is to serve the public interest, and there are few things that are more in the public interest than universal education.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
what’s wrong with an overhead projector; it would be good enough to project economic failure graphs for the Republicoids; We could teach kids how Bush and pals like to tax people by printing money.
Mcain could show how the droids luuuv the kiddywinks so much that he could paint flying pigs on the planetarium with Mizz Piggy’s lipstick, that would show the height and age challenged little scroungers.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
McCain has surely been to a planetarium. He was a naval aviator.
Naval officers are required to learn celestial navigation (or at least
they used to be). You can be sure the Naval Academy has a
planetarium or at least it did when he was there. Most likely
he was required to take a class involving using the planetarium.
He knows what a planetarium projector is. There’s no excuse for
what he said.
McCain picked Palin as Vice President. That’s enough to tell
me how he feels about science. At best he thinks it’s something
to be discarded when expedient.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The First Amendment of The Constitution of the United states:
You’ve probably heard of ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of religion’. In fact, those two lies are simply part and parcel of the Atheist Nation Myth.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
OMG I hope that election is over asap. Just that whole debates makes me sick - and as a german guy i’m not even directly affected.
To come to the point: Education means future to the kids, educated kids means future for science and technical development, means future for the economy.
Stupidity means stagnancy - or regression. Stagnancy means death. Regression means sudden death.
/So try to guess which guy(s) i favor
October 8th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
[…] info here.) —Tags: 2008_election, mccain, […]
October 8th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
hehe Fritriac, I bet you favor the same person I favor and that I believe most people in Europe favor…
October 8th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
ccpetersen Says: “If you are going to criticize Obama for using the same procedure that every other member of the senate and house uses to get funding, then you’d better be prepared to critique every other member’s requests.”
You need to go to Wikipedia and look up political earmark. An earmark like this one is NOT ‘what every other member’ uses. It’s a subterfuge designed to fund a pet project without subjecting the project to the normal vetting process.
Just because we like planetariums does not excuse funding it in this underhanded way.
This example is instructive because it shows that Obama is all about business as usual, whereas McCain really does want to reform government.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Some libertarians say that the federal government shouldn’t fund it, that cities and states should.
They say this, despite also opposing whenever a city or state funds anything.
Also, cities and states do not have nearly the tax authority of the US federal government, and could not raise the funds needed by themselves.
October 8th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I made a handy little image to make it a little easier for McCain to remember the difference between a planetarium projector and an overhead projector.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smailtronic/2923889488/
October 8th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
I don’t think the big deal is about what the responsibilities of the government are and whether or not the government should be funding planetaria.
I think the big deal is that McCain had a myriad of topics he could have picked to marginalize and use as a weapon against Obama. What topic does he pick but FUNDING FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION! That fraks me off!
October 8th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Phil, try to keep above the fray. It is too tempting now that you are in an even more public position to use the liar label (do you claim then that other politicians are not liars?) and that sort of purjorative language. Sure, all us scientists can be disappointed that McCain doesn’t double-check the “facts” that get shovelled to him by his staff. Do you really thing HE poured over THAT GUY’S record and the only “earmark” he could come up with he would intentionally have to lie about? Nope. He gets these handed to him, and yeah, he probably has never been to a planetarium. He wouldn’t know if it was a lie or true, his failing is who is appoints to his staff and for that he needs to take responsibility.
Just try to keep from going partisan. I used you as an example earlier this month of someone who tried hard to give benefit of the doubt to both sides. Sure, it fires up some of your readers and all their comments make it seem justified, but we scientists shouldn’t appear biased. Even the appearance of bias hurts our credibility. I see it way too much as the election approaches. People who are skeptics and rational (often scientists or science sympathizers), yet they cave to their (usually leftward) bias and they are not as critical about their end of the political spectrum. You can’t express your “personal feelings” quite the way you used to now that you are frankly a public figure representing science. I think it is quite fair to point out that in both debates, McCain made the same error in judgement, and because that hurts his credibility, he should fire the guy who’s pointing our science-related earmarks, because he sucks at his job!
October 8th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
No one messes with Science!!!!
October 8th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Llewely,
I have never heard the “Atheist Nation Myth.” Who is making that claim?
I can make the claim that many of the founding fathers were actually deists and were, in fact, hostile to Christianity; and, to be fair, many of them were Christians in their personal lives. But I have never heard of ANM. Who made that claim? What they set up was a separation of Church and State as far as the federal government was concerned.
“History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.”
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
@John Varsik
McCain has surely been to a planetarium. He was a naval aviator. Naval officers are required to learn celestial navigation (or at least they used to be).
Don’t be so sure. He graduated 894 out of 899. And he only managed that because of his Daddy and Granddaddy were so important. I think it’s there’s a good chance he was getting wasted on planetarium day. Actually, that was probably every day.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Thank you for explaining precisely what the piece of equipment is that was purchased. I still stand by my previous statement on the other entry, however. Why have the government pay for it? Have fund raisers. Charge admission. Find a way that does not force people who do not WANT to pay for things like this, to pay for it.
A planetarium is a business like any other. If it isn’t supporting itself then restructure, cut back, do what needs to be done but don’t presume that *I* am happy to pay for it.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Hmm maybe the government should not be paying for military accquisitions then either. I mean not everyone wants to spend money on stuff that kills people. How about a fundraiser, huh Maria?
October 8th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Phil, the Constitution doesn’t grant the federal government authority to create public schools, or fund the space program, or provide clean water. And in fact, if you read the 10th amendment, it’s explicitly forbidden from doing so. You can’t simply ignore the Constitution where you find it personally or politically expedient without forfeiting the ability to accuse others of doing the same.
Preventing the federal government from doing these things won’t cause the downfall of American society. If anything, what most libertarians argue for is a return to a truly federal system. If the federal government didn’t spend money on these earmarks and pork projects (even for the ones that, yes, are reasonable expenditures), the states could instead levy those taxes to spend money on the projects they want.
As it stands, the federal government taxes individuals, skims their share off in bureaucratic overhead, then offers that money back to the states if they agree to demands from the government. That money could just as easily be taxed by the states themselves, have less lost through attrition, then be spent on projects the states themselves decide on their own terms.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Maria, I’m not happy that I have to pay to eat food, but that doesn’t mean I think farmers and grocers aren’t worthy of being paid.
I’ve noticed a lot of people taking out all their frustrations on government because it’s the only place they have a concrete say in how things are run. If people leveled half the charges of laziness, incompetence, and greed at private companies–where they have no say in how things are run– that they do at government, there wouldn’t be a single stable business.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Phil I agree with you completely here, I am concerned however that the debate in this thread is going to tax your comment policy soon.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Stephen: source for the statement “skim their share off in bureaucratic overhead” please. Because if you’re seriously referring to the salary paid to someone for running a large agency, why aren’t you outraged that major corporations pay their CEO’s and other managers huge amounts of money?
October 8th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
The Adler Planetarium issued a response:
Statement About Senator John McCain’s Comments At The Presidential Debate
Last night, during the presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, Senator John McCain made the following statement:
McCain: “While we were working to eliminate these pork barrel earmarks he (Senator Obama) voted for nearly $1 billion in pork barrel earmark projects. Including $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?”
To clarify, the Adler Planetarium requested federal support - which was not funded - to replace the projector in its historic Sky Theater, the first planetarium theater in the Western Hemisphere. The Adler’s Zeiss Mark VI projector - not an overhead projector - is the instrument that re-creates the night sky in a dome theater, the quintessential planetarium experience. The Adler’s projector is nearly 40 years old and is no longer supported with parts or service by the manufacturer. It is only the second planetarium projector in the Adler’s 78 years of operation.
Science literacy is an urgent issue in the United States. To remain competitive and ensure national security, it is vital that we educate and inspire the next generation of explorers to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math.
Senator McCain’s statements about the Adler Planetarium’s request for federal support do not accurately reflect the museum’s legislative history or relationship with Senator Obama.
The Adler has approached the Illinois Congressional delegation the last few years for federal assistance with various initiatives. These have included museum exhibitions, equipment and educational programs we offer to area schools, including the Chicago Public Schools.
We have made requests to Senators Durbin and Obama, as well as to 6 area Congressmen from both political parties. We are grateful that all of the Members we have approached, including Senator Obama, have deemed our activities worthy of their support, and have made appropriations requests on our behalf, as they have for many worthy Illinois nonprofit organizations.
As a result of the hard work of our bipartisan congressional delegation, the Adler has been fortunate to receive a few federal appropriations the past couple of years.
However, the Adler has never received an earmark as a result of Senator Obama’s efforts. This is clearly evidenced by recent transparency laws implemented by the Congress, which have resulted in the names of all requesting Members being listed next to every earmark in the reports that accompany appropriations bills.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
@Stephen Touset
Phil, the Constitution doesn’t grant the federal government authority to create public schools, or fund the space program, or provide clean water. And in fact, if you read the 10th amendment, it’s explicitly forbidden from doing so.
Um. Where do you get that from? I must be looking at the other 10th Amendment.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Joe: Is one needed? Do you think the federal government is 100% efficient in getting money from taxes to the states?
The state will lose some proportion of the money on its own in administrative costs. Whatever that amount, it will be the same whether or not it comes from state taxes, or the federal government. If you involve the federal government, and go by the assumption that it is _not_ 100% efficient, then there _will_ be some additional amount missing. I make no claim as to the size.
But it does seem unreasonable that states get royally screwed here. The federal government taxes their citizens for funds, then offers those funds back to the states they were taxed from in the form of grants, as long as the state agrees to conditions that they may not have agreed to otherwise.
Imagine, if you will, that I take your next paycheck. I’ll be more than happy to give it to you (minus a reasonable 1% cut for myself), as long as you use it only to buy local produce, and also always drive less than 55mph. Deal?
October 8th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Jose: Sure you’re reading the correct amendment?
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This amendment states that anything not explicitly granted to the federal government is forbidden to it, being the rights of the states or the citizens. Seeing as those things aren’t granted to the federal government in the Constitution… it shouldn’t exactly take a Constitutional lawyer to figure that one out.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Dr Phil, since you mentioned my comment (Or a reasonable facsimile of my comment) as your ‘favorite’ and I am assuming you meant your favorite ‘fairly ridiculous’ one, you need to read, and understand, the Constitution. The Constitution sets up very specific things that the Federal government can do, the rest is given to the States, or the People.
>>But where does it say the government will repair roads, provide clean water, create public schools, fund the space program?<<
The Congress is given specific power for roads. “Article 1, Section 8: Congress shall have the power to…Establish Post Offices and post Roads.”
While clean water (or air) is not specifically mentioned it could be wound into the ‘General Welfare’ clause, because it is a nationwide thing necessary for everyone, unlike a planetarium which helps just one small geographic area, and a few specific people.
Public schools are a State issue. Some argue that they are a ‘general welfare’ thing (President Bush for example), but I think that would be stretching that clause beyond its limits.
And NASA, and the space program, could easily be part of the power to ‘…Provide and Maintain a Navy’ again in Art 1, Sec 8. Where else did the ‘Naval Observatory’ get its name?
The federal government has its place.
State Governments have their place.
Building and Maintaining Planetaria is a State, or Local, issue.
I would not characterize spending money on a planetarium as being foolish, and McCain’s mis-characterization is downright dishonest. But I do characterize spending federal money on such a project as being ‘extra-Constitutional’.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
@Stephen Touset
We already went through this on the other thread. But here’s why it doesn’t apply
October 8th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
You know what the rest of the world wishes you to pull out of science education. And when you are all are dying of diseases you can not cure because decided to fund ID instead of evolution. When the satelittes fail and you can not spy on your enemies. When the oil runs out and the nation uses up all of your other resources. When communications fail so you can not talk to anyone. Your entire nation will be right for the taking.
Of course we don’t but think of what will happen because of your actions today.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Definitely not a foolish use of money. However, one that the Fed Gov has no business being involved in. Education should be handled from the State level, not dictated by the Feds.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Ugh… more Constitution interpreters… didn’t we already cover this in the last thread, Jose? Where’s Todd W?
I’m not even going to start this up again… here’s the short version, Stephen, TW, et al: Stop trying to pretend you’re somehow better at interpreting the constitution than most everyone else over the last 200+ years of government. You’re just not.
Unless you can find some supreme court judgment or precedent to support your interpretation… one that backs up your claim that federal government spending on public facilities like public schools, museums, hospitals, etc is strictly unconstitutional, I really don’t want to hear it. You’d think that if this were so clearly the case, the supreme court might’ve gotten around to saying so by now… no?
October 8th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Jim Howard, while I’m not particularly impressed with Obama’s attendance record during the campaign (he voted for a mere 54% of legislation in the 110th Congress), it’s much better than Sen. McCain’s, who was only present for 36%.
Who’s been skipping work? The bailout was the first thing McCain voted on since April. McCain has chronically had one of the worst attendance records, while in (his admittedly short) tenure, Obama has racked up a rather impressive one, including 98%+ in the 109th Congress.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Heaven’s - let’s not let that pesky old Constitution get in the way.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
@ Bill Tuttle
Wouldn’t dream of it.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
@Celtic_Evolution
Don’t worry. The first post ended up being about gay bashing. The second was a constitutional war. This one’s bound to turn to something like…..alien psychics! I’ve got my fingers crossed.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
“Thank you for explaining precisely what the piece of equipment is that was purchased. I still stand by my previous statement on the other entry, however. Why have the government pay for it? Have fund raisers. Charge admission. Find a way that does not force people who do not WANT to pay for things like this, to pay for it.
A planetarium is a business like any other.”
Please note the planetarium never got the earmark nor did Obama even vote for it. This is all much ado about nothing!
Obviously the Adler, like all planetariums and science centers, is fund raising and charging admission as much as they can. Remember also that many many planetariums were built in the 50s and 60s by the government, or with government funds, in the first place as important educational institutions. They are not businesses. If you demand that planetariums be self sufficeient that’s fine, but then you must treat all educational institutions the same: museums, libraries, schools, universities, planetariums, aquariums, etc. I would suspect that admission fees would be so high that only the rich would be able to make use of them. Is that what you really want?
October 8th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I try not to buy too many chinese plastic action figures, better to carve them out of pine and hand paint. Besides who wants to fund Chinese military and aerospace adventures? We need more scientists in US business and government roles, send all the Wall Street finance wizards to China to work in the slave labor camps they fund with American dollars!
October 8th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
There are two sperate arguments going here. McCain is essentially saying that planetariums are a waste of money and implying that science education is a waste of money. Many of the people here are arguing that the federal government should not be paying for planetariums. The second argument is reasonable for a fiscal conserative to make. The first arguement is insanely stupid.
The problem with the republican party is that it has a significant minority that has no use for science. Anyone who wants to get elected as a Republican has to pander to them or risk losing substantial funding. Democrats are only marginally better but at least most of their main supporters are sane. In a lot of ways the Democrats of today are closer to the values of traditional fiscal conservatives than are the Republicans.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
You know, as a contractor providing genuinely needed support to the people serving our country, the notion of Government as this impersonal, wasteful, malevolent force akin to the Dark Side in “Star Wars” grows pretty old. Save for some monumental mistakes like unnecessary wars, tax revenue does not simply disappear into some type of bureaucratic black hole. Much of what the government does creates jobs, and eliminating or greatly reducing the government would by the same as forcing hundreds of large corporations to perform indiscriminate layoffs. When the government buys something, it is usually either produced or maintained by a U.S. firm. The salaries of contractors and government workers go right back in to local economies. And very few people associated with the government from the public or contracting side make the kind of money they could make if focused entirely on the private sector.
I was upset the first time McCain brought up the projector, fearful the second time and outraged when he started talking about across the board spending freezes with the exception of Defense. Firstly, why exempt Defense? Is it just presumed that Defense is infallible in its spending. Secondly, why an across the board freeze? By failing to adjust for inflation, a freeze would effectively lower the wages thousands upon thousands who work for their government because they love their country and realize that government and country are very difficult to separate in any meaningful sense.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
There are about 4000 visible stars in the sky.
This projector cost 3 million dollars.
That is $750 per projected star.
When this thing was built:
there were no solid state lasers
there were no LED’s
there were no cheap computers
there were no fiber optics
Do you guys really mean to tell me that despite the huge advances in technology, the Zeiss is still the most cost-effective way of projecting stars?
October 8th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
@ Celtic_Ev and Jose,
Could one of you post a link to the other threads mentioned in your recent posts? I missed them and they sound interesting.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Libertarianism is to politics what creationism (or maybe I.D.) is to science. It’s a cult, full of crackpots with nutty ideas. What a surprise that it is in the USA where both these loony movements flourish the most! What happens when you don’t regulate capitalism enough and properly? You get the current financial crisis. What happens when you try and make government small, and cut back on all the services and programs that governments provide in civilised countries? You get the USA, which lags every other western country in social health indicators. Libertarians are a f***ing joke:
October 8th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
JPS, FCD
Sure… Phil actually refers to it in this thread, but you can click my name to get to the post from last night… there’s over 140 comments, but it’s about 1/3 of the way down where it starts to degenerate into a constitutional debate, beginning with a comment from XI where he (or she… don’t want to assume) derisively tells Phil to read the constitution and claims that supporting this planetarium funding is clearly unconstitutional.
I admit I could have started off less defensively in asserting my position, but the tenor of the comment irked me.
Enjoy.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
@ Lab Lemming
Honestly, I’m not sure… I don’t know of one… perhaps Phil does. If there is one that is commercially available, I’d be interested to know if this or other planetaria have considered the alternatives to using the Zeiss. If there isn’t, perhaps you’ve got yourself a real business opportunity there, Lab Lemming… I know I’d support finding new, perhaps better ways of representing the cosmos in our planetaria if possible.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Not exactly true. They have plenty of use for science when it comes to consuming all the wonderful high-tech goodies that are the fruits of all that humanistic fundamental science research they’re so quick to condemn.
It’s what that research tells us about the nature of Earth and the Universe they really hate.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Bigfoot, you’ll get no argument from me about science being a good thing, and a field well worth substantial investment. If you’re talking basic science, something which NSF increasingly does not fund, then I’d guess 10% of entertainment spending would far more than double the science budget.
But that isn’t what I was referring to. The number of people we need — in the sense of how many we (societally, corporately, whatehaveyou) are willing or interested in hiring — is, and has been for 40+ years, lower in the US than the number of graduates. This, you can find by looking in to what happens to graduates in science after they graduate (pick your level). ‘Get a series of escalating bids from would-be employers’ is not one of the things you find widespread evidence of. Get a job in some unrelated area (Wall street was hot for physicists in the 90s bubble, at a time when physics was cold) is a significant player. That is not what happens if there is a shortage of some skill. If there were a shortage in some area, then anyone graduating in that area is gobbled up, as is anybody who is somewhere vaguely close. In practice, it is the reverse. People close are ignored, people in the general area are ignored, and people who specifically studied that area compete with the others who did so to see which 1/3 will enter a ‘permanent’ position, which 1/3 will enter the temporary position treadmill, and 1/3 will be looking for jobs on Wall Street or other unrelated. (Figures approximately appropriate for physics at the doctoral level since the 1991 survey by the American Institute of Physics see their web site).
I’m speaking specifically the US as this is a US politics thread. Situations are different (both directions) in other countries. Shortage is not what the US has of science graduates — compared to science jobs. I wish there were a shortage, as that would indicate we’d shifted our priorities to something which is fundamental to our national future. But until I see plummeting rates of temporary hires (prior to 1989, it was 2/3rds who were hired in to ‘permanent’ positions; it dropped from 2/3rds to 1/3rd between successive biennial surveys), a sudden increase in salaries, etc., shortage is a description I’ll reject. We know what a market economy does in the face of a shortage. That is not happening w.r.t. science hiring in any broad scale.
If a shortage ever did develop, it would be temporary — rapidly fillable from the graduates of the past 20 years who didn’t get jobs in science at the time, or by new graduates changing out of other majors in favor of science. We graduate about 1.2 million bachelor’s each year. Physical science now gets under 0.02 million (Department of Education figures; compare physical science to landscaping, mathematics to theology, anything at all to business).
But the shortage of general understanding of what science is, how it works, what it can and can’t do — all essential for making informed political decisions as voters and legislators … That is a present shortage and has been … always. Sometimes better, and sometimes, like now, worse. Having an informed population is vital to a democracy. Planetaria are one of the routes to that.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Lab Lemming,
Google Image Search “planetarium show.”
While the technology available has improved, so has our desire for more exciting planetarium shows.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
McCain is an intellectual troglodyte. He’s a nepotistic military spoiled brat and political opportunist who is milking populist conceptions of “elitism” for all it’s worth - hence the planetarium comments in the debate. His political base has no use for planetariums, and neither does he. We don’t need no stinkin’ science! IMO, he is an odious character, and unfit to be president or commander in chief:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/print
October 8th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
The image at www.astro.ucla.edu/planetarium/ <– is very telling of why those points of light get so expensive.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
This, too. http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2361/2614495473_be250f0b01.jpg?v=0 <– Again, a lot more than points of light.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
“Where is the outrage over Obama’s support of Surbanes-Oxeley which has been destructive to the capital markets that fund all the private science innovation? ”
Because people still remember Enron and the bogus black outs and gamed energy market in California that has pretty much bankrupted the state. Sarbanes-Oxley was a direct result of that. And people don’t buy the “regulation is evil” boogeyman right now since lobbyist authored retard deregulation is what got us in the current mess to begin with.
The last three financial train wrecks(S&L, Enron, sub-prime) are direct results of such short sighted deregulation authored by lobbyists.
Shorter story: we don’t believe you deregulation guys any more. We’re sick of paying for your mistakes. Thanks for nothing.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
McCain’s an idiot, period. But I wonder if the Adler Planetaria guys could project an o’head transparency with the Zeiss just to see what it would look like? Incredibly cool?! It could even say: “Vote Science.” Invite the press. Probably if we just point and laugh at McSame he’ll go away!
October 8th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Does he include teflon, Tang, and velcro?
October 8th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Aww, this reminds me of the good ole debates right after the Constitutions ratification. Can we only do what is explicitly said in the Constitution or is it implied that we can do things that aren’t so long as they don’t violate the Constitution? The historian in me comes out with every presidential election (yet considering that I’m 23, this is only the 2nd election I’ve actually been allowed to vote in….)
October 8th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
@ Lab Lemming
Your question got me curious, so I did some research…
From what I’ve read so far, it looks as though there are some alternatives to the Zeiss technology currently used in most planetariums. Some planetariums are now using digital projection using LCD, DLP and laser technology, but these have limitations. Specifically, they don’t provide high enough resolution for “pin-point” stars, the colors are not accurate, and LCDs don’t do a great job of projecting either true black or true white.
The consensus seems to be that while DLP and LCOS technology are improving, we’re still a long way away from being able to represent a star field that can compete with the latest Zeiss projector technology. There are competing products with the Zeiss, such as the Konica-Minolta Infinium series, but what I’ve read points to the Zeiss Mark VI being one of the best, if not the best, star projector available currently.
Phil, feel free to correct me if I’m way off on any of what I just wrote…
October 8th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
“Obama opened this purchase up to justified criticism by making it an earmark. That means it skipped the normal vetting process that is used for legitimate government spending.
Had Obama used the correct appropriations procedures then there would be no criticism. But that would mean showing up for work, something Obama rarely does.”
Did you NOT read the statement from the Adler planetarium folks? There was NO earmark coming from Obama on the project. I can’t for the life of me figure out why Obama laid down and let McCain kick him in the groin for something he didn’t do. What is the strategy there? Maybe he figured the truth would come out and everyone would know that McCain is a liar and a fool. Nor did I hear one peep out of Mr. Obama’s mouth praising planetariums and their public funding.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Yes indeed, I support many nutty ideas. Drug legalization. Free trade. Gay marriage. Legalized prostitution. The abolition of the death penalty. Open borders. Legalized gambling. Reduction of copyrights. Lowering the drinking age to 18. Severe cuts in government spending.
Yup, I’m a crazy nutball.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
@ Tom Marking
I was wondering the same thing regarding Obama’s lack of response. I suppose it could have been due to the god-awful format for this debate, which limited the number and the length of time each had for rebuttal. I suppose he could have seen it as “low-hanging fruit” and decided to focus on other of McCain’s many, many inaccurate statements that might carry more weight with the participants and the nation, in general…
I’m going with the “pick your fights” theory, and he just didn’t have the time to prioritize a response to this claim above other issues… just my opinion.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
@ Sean O’Hara
You sound more like a total anarchist to me…
October 8th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Sean,
What makes many Libertarians nutballs (I don’t know you), is their sad clinging to Libertarian dogma. I actually agree with Libertarians about 85% of the time (according to a test I took, given by Libertarians…seriously), but that doesn’t mean I am willing to shut my brain down over the last 15%. It’s the same with anyone who blindly follows a party line…they surrender their intellect to party dogma.
“ALL government is bad” is one example. That is a ludicrous notion, easily disproved by facts, and yet Libertarians cling to it like it was the hem of their mother’s dress. There are no easy answers, Sean. Sorry.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Almost forgot, Sean,
Read the article, then we can talk. Until then you’re just flailing.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
@Jose
It’s pretty clear from the mindsets of our founding fathers that “general welfare” did not include anything under the sun. In a purely literal sense, just about _any_ government action could be taken under the guise of being for the “general welfare”. Remember, as far as you want to take that clause, your political opposites will want to take it just as far in the opposite direction.
October 8th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
It looks like Stephen didn’t read through our debate over this in the last thread, Jose…
sigh…
October 8th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Sorry. I just can’t get excited over the planetarium 1500 miles from me when my (BLEEPING) early retirement is getting pushed out because all of the (BLEEPING) ***IDIOTS*** in Congress and the miserable, sociopathic producers of NOTHING on Wall Street have ruined the economy and the world. Overhead projector? I got you overhead projector right here.
And don’t even try to blame one side or the other. If you seriously think just one said of the aisle is to blame here, your ideology has just shut down your brain. It has just shut it off, and it is DEAD.
The world economy has been raped, and what are people arguing about? Planetarium projectors and “that one” during the debate and Weatherman bombings when Obama was 8 years old. Will someone please build an L5 colony already? I want to get out of here! To quote the Covenant leader from Halo, “You are, all of you, vermin!”
(shakes fist)
I’m sorry. I might be in the early stages of a nervous breakdown this week. Oddly, it has nothing to do with the economy. It’s been building for a long time.
Sean O’Hara: Drug legalization. Free trade. Gay marriage. Legalized prostitution. The abolition of the death penalty. Open borders. Legalized gambling. Reduction of copyrights. Lowering the drinking age to 18. Severe cuts in government spending.
Drug legalization: OK
Free trade: it depends
Gay marriage: OK
Legalized prostitution: OK (could use some right now, in fact)
The abolition of the death penalty: Meh… never was strong one way or the other because it hardly ever happens anyway.
Open borders: Absolutley NO. That one actually is crazy nutball.
Legalized gambling: OK
Reduction of copyrights: It depends. I think the real problem lies in the current patent system, and that’s coming from someone who has nine patents.
Lowering the drinking age to 18: I’d either raise it to 25 or lower it to 12. Depends on my mood on any given day.
Severe cuts in government spending: Where?
October 8th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Celtic_Evolution Says: You sound more like a total anarchist to me…
The correct term in minarchist.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Ahh… thanks QD… and now I have a new word to use in everyday conversation… excellent!
October 8th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
What makes many Libertarians nutballs (I don’t know you), is their sad clinging to Libertarian dogma.
Oh, yeah, and *none* of the other ideological types EVER do *that*!
EVERYONE has dogma of one kind or another.
Unless they have catma.
HAHAHAHAHA!
I crack me up. Or, I’m cracking up. One of the two. Or both. Maybe.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Could be the booze….
Nah….
October 8th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
@Celtic_Evolution
On a hopefully more… salient note, then. Just remember, every power you allow government to have will wind up in the hands of a politician you hate. Whenever you want to give government a responsibility, think about it being a power wielded by Bush.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
“Libertarianism is to politics what creationism (or maybe I.D.) is to science. It’s a cult, full of crackpots with nutty ideas. What a surprise that it is in the USA where both these loony movements flourish the most! What happens when you don’t regulate capitalism enough and properly? You get the current financial crisis.”
Hmmm, interesting. Recent $850 billion bailout (i.e., ripoff) package going to Wall Street. Was supposed to calm the stock market but the Dow has dropped more than a thousand points since its passage.
Current sitting Republican President: Pushed it on all us dumb suckers
Evil deluded sitting Treasury Secretary: Hatched it
Republican candidate for President: Voted for it
Democratic candidate for President: Voted for it
Libertarian candidate for President: Opposed it
I guess I support the nutty cult. Now, can I get my share of the $850 billion back?
October 8th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
@Celtic:
No problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchist
I used to be a minarchist until the age of 16 when I realized people are, in general, too stupid, greedy, broken and awful for such a system to work. I think we have WAY to much government now, but I feel the real solution lies somewhere between minarchism and the current bloated, choking mess.
Everyone just needs to be open minded, and handle situations individually.
I’d say the ONLY overarching rule I have is to try and solve problems at the source, and then move outward.
1. Family
2. Extended family
3. Community
4. City
5. County
6. State
7. Federal
You start at 1 and reach 7 only as a last resort.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
@ Stephen Touset
I won’t argue that point… my point is merely that in cases where constitutional interpretation is needed, we have the supreme court to make rulings… so it’s not like it’s totally open to any interpretation you want. You think an issue, like this funding, is unconstitutional based on your interpretation, bring it to the Supreme Court…
So far, though…
October 8th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Libertarianism is to politics what creationism (or maybe I.D.) is to science.
Actually, lets generalize that hypothesis.
Rigid ideology is to politics what religion is to science.
There. Better.
To be scientific in politics, you draw upon many different disciplines. In this case, the disciplines are all the different ideologies. You use them as toolboxes, taking bits from each to fix a problem. What you DON’T do is dive into one of them and live there, which is what most people do. So all most people have is a hammer, and every societal problem looks like a nail.
It’s just poetry, isn’t it?
October 8th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
@Celtic_Evolution
I think a fundamental problem is that the Supreme Court actually has no real accountability to enforce the Constitution. Virtually every Supreme Court case has multiple justices split with reasonable and not so reasonable opinions of what powers the Constitution grants and restricts. I think most people can agree that just about any nutjob would be capable of bending the meaning and intent of the Constitution to support any viewpoint they could conceivably hold.
I admit, I’m kind of between a rock and a hard place here. Admittedly, the Supreme Court is responsible for interpreting the Constitution, and their opinion of it becomes the law of the land. But at the same time, it should be obvious to all that between the sheer deluge of new laws being passed (of which only a fraction could possibly ever be tried in the Supreme Court, due to their number) and the political leanings of individual justices, the Constitution is rarely enforced to the degree it should be.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
@ Celtic Evolution:
How does a Zeiss get colors correct when a high quality tungsten lamp has a temperature of around 3200K? That would turn the entire sky into red giants.
October 8th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
That a worthy nonprofit educational institution can get help should not be controversial. The question should be how it should be done. I would not give federal money unless the local area was not willing to put up some money, i.e. some kind of scheme which the feds match either state or local funds.
/Still McCain’s objection is asinine.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Celtic & Lab Lemming:
Zeiss sells the top of the line optical planetarium projectors. The Mark IX is currently their high end model. Yes, there are competitors in the optical projector market, and digital projection is making serious inroads, but if you want the best, and have the cash, that’s where you go. Regarding LL’s temperature question, these projectors don’t have a single lamp inside of the starball, they use fiber optics to ensure properly colored stars.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
@Stephen Touset
I think most people can agree that just about any nutjob would be capable of bending the meaning and intent of the Constitution to support any viewpoint they could conceivably hold.
Our government already has built in nutjob protection. Imagine if there was someone who wanted federal funding to genetically engineer pink bears. First they’d have to get it on a bill. Then the House would have to pass it, followed by the Senate. And finally, the president would have to sign it into law. If somehow it did make it this far, it would be subject to challenges in our judicial system.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Remember, McCain belongs to a party that still has serious objections to Copernican astronomy. Right now he’d do anything to pander to the religious right, including undergo an exorcism.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Shouldn’t there be some kind of internet law such that a commenter complaining about “my tax dollars being wasted on [x]” will be mercilessly teased until or unless they state or have stated exactly how much of their tax burden was actually spent on said project?
“My 0.34 cents a year shouldn’t pay for no damn food stamps!” is at least a coherent thought, as opposed to “some unknown amount (possibly none) of my tax money is bein’ spent on sumpin’, and I’m mad! Stupid gubmint. Now where can I buy some lotto tickets?”
-Autumn
October 8th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Did senator McCain skipped education in his hurry to get to Vietnam? The “projector” story just shows how out of touch, out of date and technology illiterate this man is. Being a 1960s war hero is clearly not enough to lead America in the 21st century.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Phil, I still disagree with you here. A project like this should be funded through the Department of Education or the National Science Foundation. Should an educational institution’s success depend on how much pull their politicians have in Washington?
October 8th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
As a quick addendum to my previous post, it also needs to be said that if a planetarium wants to be able to offer the big, new, wow-factor planetarium shows (such as the Black Holes show that Phil worked on), they need a digital projection system along with, or instead of an optical projector like a Zeiss. Very few places can afford to have both, so most planetariums are forced to choose one (and the strengths and weaknesses inherent to that system) over the other when upgrading or opening their theater.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Quiet Desperation: “Oh, yeah, and *none* of the other ideological types EVER do *that*!
EVERYONE has dogma of one kind or another.”
Exactly the point I was making. Partisans surrender their intellect to the party.
That said, I thought your posts actually were pretty clever and funny.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Just dropped into this discussion and find it fascinating to read and also reassuring that most folks out there feel that more and better science and math education in our nation is sorely needed. I was a bit mystified last night at McCain’s railing against an “overhead projector” as I didn’t know what he was talking about. I was then aghast today when I found out that it was the planetarium projector needed for the Adler Planetarium for the great work that they do. Whenever I come to Chicago I always rejoice in that it’s a great city of museums that rivals many others. Museums and other forms of educational institutions require the support of government if we require the enlightenment we need to survive intellectually. It’s my opinion that it’s those like the narrow-minded far-right creationists, aloof home schoolers, book-banners, and other exotic anti-societal fringe groups who support McCain who are against expenditures like this, and who are deathly afraid of what scientific discovery and man’s curiousity evidenced by continual factual discovery in our universe. I just don’t understand why they don’t have the wisdom to embrace and unify both their beliefs and those on the other side of the fence to have a greater understanding of the benefits that are brought to humankind by science. Does everything have to be so literal with them? Are they afraid that the Hubble Telescope will actually find the Big Bang? Surely this isn’t what God intended, if indeed there is a God who made us all?
October 8th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
I wish NASA would do some sort of outreach to the states for stuff like this( I know…the funding is tee tiny, But then how do you explain the Challenger Centers).
October 8th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
This was a deliberate lie on McCain’s part.
He chose his words very carefully - most people have a reasonable idea of the cost of an “overhead projector”, so by using that completely misleading terminology for a complex and expensive piece of equipment he was trying to accuse Obama not only of waste, but also of corruption - evoking the wasteful excesses endemic to the old Soviet Union, to take one example. He’s counting on his target audience being people proud of not being able to say “planetarium”. In doing so he ties himself ever more closely to the jackass Bush, who glories in his own ignorance and lack of curiosity (of course the selection of Palin - who probably should have been called “Georgina”, being Dubya in drag - should have made that crystal clear already).
McCain is a manipulative liar. What a great idea, another sociopath in the White House.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
This past April 15, I worked out that my share of my state’s library budget came out to something like $30 a year. For that, I can borrow more books, tapes, CDs and DVDs than I can carry. I think the prices at Blockbuster and Netflix are a wee bit higher than that.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
McCain’s mischaracterization is noted and agreed with, however I’m sure Obama’s earmark had nothing to do with Frank Clark, former (and at the time, current) chairman of of the Adler Planetarium raising $200,000 for the Obama presidential campaign? And to be honest, I think a private business that employees 150 people and charges between $5 and $23 for admissions could budget for a $3,000,000 projector. If not, how about Chicago, where it’s actually located pay or co-pay for it. Chicago is the US’s 3rd largest city - the projector would cost less than $1.50 per tax payer. As you said it is just a one time cost, unlikely to be repeated anytime soon. If Not, Illinois is the US’s 5th most populous state. The question is not, is this a worthy cause. It is unquestionably worthwhile. The question is, is it a cause the federal government itself should be the one to foot the bill? For a private (though admittedly non-profit) enterprise. I’m going to have to go with no. The problem with earmarks, there are thousands of them. And if you spend enough time you’ll find a campaign contribution - at minimum, tied to each and every one. Don’t you agree that we should at least make it a little challenging to buy a politician?
October 8th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I think you missed the point, Phil. McCain was making a point about earmarking as a funding source, and using the star projector as an example. I don’t think it’s anti-science to expect that such funding should go through the proper channels, such as through a particular committee. I am all for planetariums, and I don’t see anything in what McCain has said as indicating that he is against planetariums.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
*sigh*
I hate this idiotic “privatize everything!!!” mantra. granted, a lot of things work better that way, but investment in people generally doesn’t (they insist you pay upfront). You know what often happens to planetaria (and educational museums) when they privatize? they shift to cheaper, more money-producing, more attention-grabbing fluff, and abandon the deeper stuff. they turn education into edutainment
the last thing we need is less education and more edutainment.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
arensb, let me personally thank you for putting in your $30 into a local library. I’m actually hoping that was a typo and you meant $300, because $30 for a year of books, DVD’s, magazines, newspapers, CD’s, computer classes etc. is extremely little.
I’d use $30 in 2 weeks if I didn’t have a public library nearby.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
McCain: Is it safe?… Is it safe?
BA: You’re talking to me?
McCain: Is it safe?
BA: Is what safe?
October 9th, 2008 at 12:11 am
“The yearly budgets have grown accordingly and now exceed $2 million a year for the engineering department alone!” From wikiChicago.
Alder is a non-profit, but also a business. With the number of employees they have, I’m sure at least one of them is an accountant. Their old equipment would be fully depreciated by now, and the price of new equipment - I kinda doubt it’s that big of a surprise. If it was not budgeted for the planetarium is fairly irresponsible. Schools don’t have admissions and do have government oversight. This is a “non-profit” educational theme park. I can’t even begin to imagine that their funding plan for their main attraction was “When this one stops working let’s ask the gub’ment to buy us a newer one.” That seriously fails the sniff test. The money comes from somewhere, and that much money could buy a fairly reasonable amount of infrastructure work.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:20 am
October 9th, 2008 at 12:39 am
http://wttf.org/strips/2008-10-07.jpg
October 9th, 2008 at 12:46 am
McCain sucks! He’s been riding on his “I was captive in Vietnam” story, but reality of 2000s is catching up. The republican administration will surely find a way to thwart the 3rd presidential election going for democrats in a row.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:48 am
I would rather the taxpayers spend 3 million on a federal level for a new planetarium than 700 BILLION to bail out corporations that are taking half million dollar siestas on the taxpayers dime(thanks AIG). This was the privatizing slippery slope.
October 9th, 2008 at 1:15 am
“Scoots” away from Quiet Desperation very carefully.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:21 am
That cartoon is wonderful
But: Going to a planetarium is lie going on vaccation for me. I live about 10km east of Dortmund, Germany, and I think some folks here know what that means. I hate light-pollution! So, to see the night sky as I should see it (or I’d really love to see it) I must go to a planetarium.
Believe it or not: It was this year (in summer!) that I was able to see the Milky Way from where I live for the FIRST time. The first time I ever saw it was one year ago when I went to the observatory “Hoher List” in the Eifel - there it was quite dark and I was really amazed to see it - it was awesome!!
Planeteria are great, even if you fall asleep in there
October 9th, 2008 at 2:26 am
Leaving aside if the federal government should be funding local affairs, micromanaging by congress bypasses the mechanisms in place to assure that the money is being spent wisely. 700 billion the government will get back at least some, and perhaps all or all + profit. Privatizing? This is social engineering. Giving loans to bad credit risks was something the government encouraged and enforced. Decoupling loans from people’s ability to pay is at the heart of it and soul of it. And I promise you that wasn’t a republican policy.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:59 am
oh, and since there’s harping about Obama’s earmarks: if McCain wants to do earmark-cleaning, he should start with his own ticket. Palin has drawn more pork than Obama and Biden combined.
I’m not a big fan of earmarking, and there should be better ways to get individual projects funded, but the hypocrisy hurts.